| Title |
Assessment of Spirometry and Impulse Oscillometry in Relation to Asthma Control
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Lung, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00408-014-9674-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Arvind Manoharan, William J. Anderson, Joseph Lipworth, Brian J. Lipworth |
| Abstract |
Guidelines advocate the use of spirometry to assess pulmonary function in asthmatic patients. Commonly used measures include forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), forced expiratory ratio (FEV1/FVC), and forced mid-expiratory flow between 25 and 75 % of forced vital capacity (FEF25-75). Impulse oscillometry (IOS) is an effort-independent test performed during tidal breathing. IOS may be used to assess the total and central airway resistance at 5 Hz (R5) and 20 Hz (R20), respectively, and hence derive the peripheral airway resistance from the difference (R5-R20). We compared spirometry and IOS as tests of global airway function (i.e., FEV1, FEV1/FVC, R5) and putative measures of small airways function (i.e., FEF25-75, R5-R20) and their relationship to oral steroid and short-acting beta-agonist (SABA) use as surrogates for long-term asthma control. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 5 | 71% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 86% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 50 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 12% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 22% |
| Unknown | 13 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 46% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 15 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 29 October 2015.
All research outputs
#2,696,852
of 22,774,233 outputs
Outputs from Lung
#62
of 884 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,673
of 331,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lung
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,774,233 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 884 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 331,266 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 92% of its contemporaries.