| Title |
Non-emphysematous chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is associated with diabetes mellitus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2466-14-164 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Craig P Hersh, Barry J Make, David A Lynch, R Graham Barr, Russell P Bowler, Peter MA Calverley, Peter J Castaldi, Michael H Cho, Harvey O Coxson, Dawn L DeMeo, Marilyn G Foreman, MeiLan K Han, Benjamin J Harshfield, John E Hokanson, Sharon Lutz, Joe W Ramsdell, Elizabeth A Regan, Stephen I Rennard, Joyce D Schroeder, Frank C Sciurba, Robert M Steiner, Ruth Tal-Singer, Edwin JR van Beek, Edwin K Silverman, James D Crapo, the COPDGene and ECLIPSE Investigators |
| Abstract |
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been classically divided into blue bloaters and pink puffers. The utility of these clinical subtypes is unclear. However, the broader distinction between airway-predominant and emphysema-predominant COPD may be clinically relevant. Objectives: To define clinical features of emphysema-predominant and non-emphysematous COPD patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 States | 4 | 27% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 20% |
| Canada | 1 | 7% |
| Greece | 1 | 7% |
| Argentina | 1 | 7% |
| Belgium | 1 | 7% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 3 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 60% |
| Scientists | 4 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 98 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 17 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 19 | 19% |
| Unknown | 32 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 10% |
| Unknown | 36 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 25 November 2014.
All research outputs
#1,954,528
of 25,641,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#92
of 2,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,020
of 274,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#2
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,641,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,294 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 274,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.