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 |
Absence of human rhinovirus and respiratory syncytial virus from bronchoalveolar lavage and bronchial biopsies of selected patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Respiratory Research, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12931-016-0323-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Styliani Giannakaki, Lida Politi, Elvira Markella Antonogiannaki, Nick Spanakis, Georgios Arsenis, Vasiliki Filaditaki, Spyridon Zakynthinos, Napoleon Karagiannidis, Athanassios Tsakris |
| Abstract |
Previous studies have reported very different rates of human rhinovirus (HRV) and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) genome detection in nasal and sputum samples, but not in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and bronchial biopsy samples. Our study aimed to investigate the presence of HRV and RSV in the lungs of 31 consecutive patients with stable COPD (11 GOLD stage I, 11 II, and 9 III) and 22 control subjects (12 current or past smokers, and 10 non-smokers), who underwent diagnostic (e.g., lung cancer) and/or therapeutic (e.g., hemoptysis) fibreoptic bronchoscopy in a university hospital in Athens, Greece. Viral RNA of HRV and RSV were not detected in any of the samples of COPD patients or control subjects after being processed with real-time PCR. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 15% |
| Researcher | 3 | 12% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 10 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 19% |
| Unknown | 9 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 January 2016.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#2,216
of 3,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#246,392
of 405,739 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#30
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,062 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 405,739 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.