You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Infection in cystic fibrosis: impact of the environment and climate
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Expert Review of Respiratory Medicine, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1586/17476348.2016.1162715 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
KA Ramsay, RE Stockwell, SC Bell, TJ Kidd |
| Abstract |
In many countries numbers of adults with cystic fibrosis (CF) exceed that of children, with median survival predicted to surpass 50 years. Increasing longevity is, in part, due to intensive therapies including eradication of early infection and suppressive therapies and pulmonary exacerbations. Initial infections with common CF pathogens are thought to arise from the natural environment. We review the impact of climate and environment on infection in CF Specifically, several studies indicate that higher ambient temperatures, proximity to the equator and the summer season may be linked to the increased prevalence of P. aeruginosa in people with CF. The environment may also play an important role in the acquisition of Gram negative organisms other than P. aeruginosa. There is emerging data suggesting that climatic and environmental factors are likely to impact on the risk of infection with NTM and fungi in people which are found extensively throughout the natural environment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 88% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 18% |
| Unknown | 16 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Immunology and Microbiology | 10 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 14% |
| Unknown | 17 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 10 April 2016.
All research outputs
#6,115,270
of 22,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Expert Review of Respiratory Medicine
#162
of 769 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,049
of 301,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Expert Review of Respiratory Medicine
#4
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 769 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 301,263 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 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.