You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Sinus computed tomography predicts clinical response to corticosteroids in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical and Translational Allergy, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13601-018-0211-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Haiyu Hong, Dan Wang, Kai Sen Tan, Rui Zheng, Fenghong Chen, Wenxiang Gao, Haixin He, Jianbo Shi, Yunping Fan, Qintai Yang, Yueqi Sun |
| Abstract |
Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a heterogeneous inflammatory disease usually characterized by chronic eosinophilia in the sinonasal mucosa, which often requires glucocorticoid (GC) therapy. However, the therapeutic response varies markedly between individuals. The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic values of sinus computed tomography (CT) for GC-sensitivity in patients with CRSwNP. We conducted a prospective, single-blinded study of 47 consecutive patients with CRSwNP. These patients were given a course of oral prednisone (30 mg daily for 14 days) and subsequently classified into objectively GC-sensitive and -insensitive subgroup according to the change in nasal polyp size score, or subjectively GC-sensitive and -insensitive subgroup according to the change in total nasal symptom score. The following parameters were compared between GC-sensitive and GC-insensitive subgroups: Lund-Mackay scores, olfactory cleft (OC) scores, and blood eosinophil counts and ratio (percentage of the total white blood cells). 25/47 (53.2%) and 29/47 (61.7%) patients were objectively and subjectively sensitive to GC therapy, respectively. The OC score and the blood eosinophil counts and ratio in GC-sensitive subgroup were significantly higher than those in GC-insensitive subgroup, defined either objectively or subjectively. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that OC score was independent risk factor for objective or subjective GC-sensitivity. The OC score exhibited comparable accuracy with the blood eosinophil ratio as predictor of objective and subjective GC-sensitivity (the OC score AUC = 0.775 and 0.829, respectively). A OC score of 3.5 could act as a reliable indicator for predicting the clinical response to GC therapy in CRSwNP. Our prospective findings validate the potential value of sinus CT scan in predicting GC-sensitivity in CRSwNP patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Romania | 5 | 17% |
| Spain | 2 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 7% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Taiwan | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Greece | 1 | 3% |
| Uruguay | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 12 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 18 | 60% |
| Scientists | 7 | 23% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 2 | 11% |
| Researcher | 2 | 11% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 11 | 58% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 11 | 58% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 June 2019.
All research outputs
#2,081,568
of 24,541,341 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#102
of 723 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,820
of 332,906 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,541,341 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 723 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,906 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.