↓ Skip to main content

A simple method to reconstruct the molar mass signal of respiratory gas to assess small airways with a double-tracer gas single-breath washout

Overview of attention for article published in Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
A simple method to reconstruct the molar mass signal of respiratory gas to assess small airways with a double-tracer gas single-breath washout
Published in
Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11517-017-1633-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Johannes Port, Ziran Tao, Annika Junger, Christoph Joppek, Philipp Tempel, Kim Husemann, Florian Singer, Philipp Latzin, Sophie Yammine, Joachim H. Nagel, Martin Kohlhäufl

Abstract

For the assessment of small airway diseases, a noninvasive double-tracer gas single-breath washout (DTG-SBW) with sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) and helium (He) as tracer components has been proposed. It is assumed that small airway diseases may produce typical ventilation inhomogeneities which can be detected within one single tidal breath, when using two tracer components. Characteristic parameters calculated from a relative molar mass (MM) signal of the airflow during the washout expiration phase are analyzed. The DTG-SBW signal is acquired by subtracting a reconstructed MM signal without tracer gas from the signal measured with an ultrasonic sensor during in- and exhalation of the double-tracer gas for one tidal breath. In this paper, a simple method to determine the reconstructed MM signal is presented. Measurements on subjects with and without obstructive lung diseases including the small airways have shown high reliability and reproducibility of this method.

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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 50%
Researcher 3 19%
Other 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Unknown 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 7 44%
Engineering 2 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 13%
Mathematics 1 6%
Sports and Recreations 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 19%
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 07 June 2018.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing
#1,899
of 2,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,559
of 323,203 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing
#9
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 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 2,053 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. 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 323,203 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 11 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.