↓ Skip to main content

Latent class analysis to define radiological subgroups in pulmonary nontuberculous mycobacterial disease

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pulmonary Medicine, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
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.
Title
Latent class analysis to define radiological subgroups in pulmonary nontuberculous mycobacterial disease
Published in
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12890-018-0675-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steven A. Cowman, Joseph Jacob, Sayed Obaidee, R. Andres Floto, Robert Wilson, Charles S. Haworth, Michael R. Loebinger

Abstract

Nontuberculous mycobacterial (NTM) pulmonary disease has conventionally been classified on the basis of radiology into fibrocavitary and nodular-bronchiectatic disease. Whilst being of great clinical utility, this may not capture the full spectrum of radiological appearances present. The aim of this study was to use latent class analysis (LCA) as an unbiased method of grouping subjects with NTM-pulmonary disease based on their CT features and to compare the clinical characteristics of these groups. Individuals with NTM-pulmonary disease were recruited and a contemporaneous CT scan obtained. This was scored using an NTM-specific scoring system. LCA was used to identify groups with common radiological characteristics. The analysis was then repeated in an independent cohort. Three classes were identified in the initial cohort of 85 subjects. Group 1 was characterised by severe bronchiectasis, cavitation and aspergillomas, Group 2 by relatively minor radiological changes, and Group 3 by predominantly bronchiectasis only. These findings were reproduced in an independent cohort of 62 subjects. Subjects in Group 1 had a lower BMI and serum albumin, higher serum CRP, and a higher mortality. These findings suggest that NTM-pulmonary may be divided into three radiological subgroups, and that important clinical and survival differences exist between these groups.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 20%
Other 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Researcher 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 6 24%
Unknown 5 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 4 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 12 January 2019.
All research outputs
#15,018,183
of 23,102,082 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#994
of 1,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,566
of 335,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#22
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,102,082 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 335,278 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.