| Title |
Distinctive bronchial inflammation status in athletes: basophils, a new player
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Applied Physiology, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00421-012-2475-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Beatriz Sastre, Mar Fernández-Nieto, María Jesús Rodríguez-Nieto, Erica Aguado, Joaquín Sastre, Victoria del Pozo |
| Abstract |
The aim of the study was to establish bronchial inflammation status and to measure eicosanoids in sputum obtained from active elite athletes. A total of 68 subjects were enrolled. Twelve were non-athletes and non-asthmatic (NAtNAs), 21 non-athlete asthmatics (NAtAs), 11 athlete non-asthmatics (AtNAs), and 24 athletes with asthma (AtAs) with positive indirect or direct bronchial challenges. Induced sputum was used to measure cells and eicosanoids. Sputum differential cell counts in all the subject groups revealed eosinophilia with the exception of NAtNAs control subjects. Athletes with and without diagnosed asthma showed a significant increase in bronchial epithelial cells and lymphocytes present in their sputum. Also, flow cytometry revealed that a significantly higher number of basophils were present in sputum from athletes (without and with asthma) when compared with non-athletes (without and with asthma). Asthmatic athletes and non-athletes showed a higher increase in LTC(4) levels and PGE(2) metabolites in sputum when compared with healthy controls. The present study identifies basophils as a new player present in athletes bronchial inflammation defining athlete status and not necessarily associated with exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Sweden | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 39 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 20% |
| Researcher | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 11% |
| Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Librarian | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 23% |
| Unknown | 7 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 45% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 11 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 January 2013.
All research outputs
#16,722,190
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#3,226
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,532
of 186,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#21
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 186,743 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.