↓ Skip to main content

Early intervention studies in infants and preschool children with cystic fibrosis: are we ready?

Overview of attention for article published in European Respiratory Journal, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 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
Early intervention studies in infants and preschool children with cystic fibrosis: are we ready?
Published in
European Respiratory Journal, March 2013
DOI 10.1183/09031936.00108212
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen Stick, Harm Tiddens, Paul Aurora, Per Gustafsson, Sarath Ranganathan, Paul Robinson, Margaret Rosenfeld, Peter Sly, Felix Ratjen

Abstract

Cystic fibrosis (CF) lung disease starts early in life and progresses even in the absence of clinical symptoms. Therefore, sensitive outcome measures to quantify and track these early abnormalities in infants and young children are needed; both for clinical care and interventional trials. Currently, the efficacy of most therapeutic interventions in CF has not been tested in children under the age of 6 years and drug development programmes have focused on assessing safety rather than efficacy in this age group. This article summarises the current status for outcome measures that can be utilised in clinical trials in infants and children with CF. Two methodologies are specifically highlighted in this review; chest computed tomography to assess structural damage of the lung and multiple breath washout as a technique to quantify ventilation inhomogeneity. While not all questions regarding the utility of these outcome measures in infants and young children have been resolved, significant advances have been made and it now appears feasible to design and conduct adequately powered efficacy studies in this age group. This could be a crucial step to further improve outcomes in CF patients as initiating effective treatment early is considered essential to prevent permanent lung damage.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 66 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 16%
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 10 15%
Researcher 7 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 9%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 13 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 19 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 23 March 2013.
All research outputs
#20,185,720
of 22,701,287 outputs
Outputs from European Respiratory Journal
#7,784
of 8,523 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,773
of 197,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Respiratory Journal
#60
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,701,287 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,523 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 197,559 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 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.