↓ Skip to main content

Serial blood eosinophils and clinical outcome in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Research, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
27 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
Title
Serial blood eosinophils and clinical outcome in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Published in
Respiratory Research, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12931-018-0840-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sun Hye Shin, Hye Yun Park, Danbee Kang, Juhee Cho, Sung Ok Kwon, Joo Hun Park, Jae Seung Lee, Yeon-Mok Oh, Don D. Sin, Woo Jin Kim, Sang-Do Lee, KOLD Study Group

Abstract

Blood eosinophils have been suggested as a potential biomarker in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and their stability over time has been investigated in a few studies. However, the association between the stability of blood eosinophils and long-term clinical outcomes in COPD patients has yet to be fully elucidated. This study aimed to evaluate the stability of blood eosinophils and its association with clinical outcomes in COPD patients. In total, 299 COPD patients from the Korean Obstructive Lung Disease cohort with at least two blood eosinophil measurements were included. Patients were stratified according to a cut-off of 300 cells/μL, and the association between eosinophil changes and all-cause mortality was analysed. The annual decline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), serial changes in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire score (SGRQ), and exacerbations during follow-up were compared among eosinophil groups. Patients were stratified into three groups according to the blood eosinophil cut-off: persistently < 300 cells/μL (PL; n = 175), variable (V; n = 68), and persistently ≥300 cells/μL (PH; n = 56). There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics (age, sex, smoking, body mass index, use of inhaled corticosteroids, exacerbations in the previous year, FEV1 (L or % predicted), or emphysema score) among the groups. During a median follow-up of 6.0 years, the PH group had a better survival rate than the PL group (adjusted mortality rate ratio, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.97; P = 0.045). The PH group also showed improved symptoms and impact domains of SGRQ score compared to the PL group. No difference was found in annual FEV1 decline or exacerbations during follow-up among the groups. Patients with persistently high blood eosinophils had a better survival rate than those with persistently low blood eosinophils. Serial follow-up of blood eosinophils could help to predict outcomes in COPD patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Researcher 5 10%
Other 5 10%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 14 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Mathematics 1 2%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 16 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 19 September 2018.
All research outputs
#2,540,270
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#271
of 3,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,169
of 340,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#7
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,062 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 340,113 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.