| Title |
Risk factors for interstitial lung disease: a 9-year Nationwide population-based study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12890-018-0660-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Won-Il Choi, Sonila Dauti, Hyun Jung Kim, Sun Hyo Park, Jae Seok Park, Choong Won Lee |
| Abstract |
Understanding the risk factors that are associated with the development of interstitial lung disease might have an important role in understanding the pathogenetic mechanism of interstitial lung disease as well as prevention. We aimed to determine independent risk factors of interstitial lung disease development. This was a retrospective cohort study with nationwide population-based 9-year longitudinal data. We selected subjects who were aged > 40 years at cohort entry and with a self-reported history of cigarette smoking. Cases were selected based on International Classification of Diseases codes. A cohort of 312,519 subjects were followed until December 2013. We used Cox regression analysis to calculate the hazard ratios (HRs) for interstitial lung disease development. Interstitial lung disease developed in 1972 of the 312,519 subjects during the 9-year period. Smoking (HR: 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-1.4), hepatitis C (HR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.1-2.3), history of tuberculosis (HR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.1-1.9), history of pneumonia (HR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.3-2.0), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.6-2.1), men (HR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.7-2.1) were significantly associated with the development of interstitial lung disease. The risk of interstitial lung disease development increases with age, and the risk was 6.9 times higher (95% CI: 5.9-8.0) in those aged over 70 than in their forties. Smoking, hepatitis C, history of tuberculosis, history of pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, male sex, and older age were significantly associated with interstitial lung disease development. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 88 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 14% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Researcher | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 7% |
| Professor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 16% |
| Unknown | 36 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 28% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Unknown | 38 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 08 April 2019.
All research outputs
#7,512,000
of 23,088,369 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#585
of 1,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,765
of 329,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#17
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,088,369 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,959 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 329,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.