↓ Skip to main content

Impulse oscillometry identifies peripheral airway dysfunction in children with adenosine deaminase deficiency

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 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
Impulse oscillometry identifies peripheral airway dysfunction in children with adenosine deaminase deficiency
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13023-015-0365-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hirsh D. Komarow, Robert Sokolic, Michael S. Hershfield, Donald B. Kohn, Michael Young, Dean D. Metcalfe, Fabio Candotti

Abstract

Adenosine deaminase-deficient severe combined immunodeficiency (ADA-SCID) is characterized by impaired T-, B- and NK-cell function. Affected children, in addition to early onset of infections, manifest non-immunologic symptoms including pulmonary dysfunction likely attributable to elevated systemic adenosine levels. Lung disease assessment has primarily employed repetitive radiography and effort-dependent functional studies. Through impulse oscillometry (IOS), which is effort-independent, we prospectively obtained objective measures of lung dysfunction in 10 children with ADA-SCID. These results support the use of IOS in the identification and monitoring of lung function abnormalities in children with primary immunodeficiencies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 40%
Other 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 13%
Researcher 1 7%
Librarian 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 40%
Computer Science 2 13%
Chemical Engineering 1 7%
Social Sciences 1 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 28 May 2016.
All research outputs
#6,963,891
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#983
of 2,620 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,385
of 388,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#29
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,620 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 388,246 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 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 61% of its contemporaries.