↓ Skip to main content

Airway hydration and COPD

Overview of attention for article published in Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
wikipedia
6 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
Title
Airway hydration and COPD
Published in
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00018-015-1946-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arunava Ghosh, R. C. Boucher, Robert Tarran

Abstract

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the prevalent causes of worldwide mortality and encompasses two major clinical phenotypes, i.e., chronic bronchitis (CB) and emphysema. The most common cause of COPD is chronic tobacco inhalation. Research focused on the chronic bronchitic phenotype of COPD has identified several pathological processes that drive disease initiation and progression. For example, the lung's mucociliary clearance (MCC) system performs the critical task of clearing inhaled pathogens and toxic materials from the lung. MCC efficiency is dependent on: (1) the ability of apical plasma membrane ion channels such as the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) and the epithelial Na(+) channel (ENaC) to maintain airway hydration; (2) ciliary beating; and (3) appropriate rates of mucin secretion. Each of these components is impaired in CB and likely contributes to the mucus stasis/accumulation seen in CB patients. This review highlights the cellular components responsible for maintaining MCC and how this process is disrupted following tobacco exposure and with CB. We shall also discuss existing therapeutic strategies for the treatment of chronic bronchitis and how components of the MCC can be used as biomarkers for the evaluation of tobacco or tobacco-like-product exposure.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 90 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Student > Master 10 11%
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 22 24%
Unknown 21 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 20 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 February 2023.
All research outputs
#5,090,476
of 24,323,943 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#1,087
of 5,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,598
of 269,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#16
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,323,943 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,600 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 269,017 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.