↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
A real-world comparison of apnea–hypopnea indices of positive airway pressure device and polysomnography
Published in
PLOS ONE, April 2017
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0174458
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The apnea hypopnea index (AHI) reported by positive airway pressure (PAP) device is widely used in clinical practice, yet its correlation with standardized AHI obtained during the sleep study is not established. The current study was conducted to investigate the correlation between AHI estimated by the PAP device and reported on the smart card with the AHI found during the PAP polysomnography (PSG) in the "real world" setting at an academic sleep center. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 280 patients who underwent a PAP titration PSG at Drexel sleep center, and were later prescribed a PAP device. The AHI was categorized in clinically relevant subgroups (as AHI ≤5 and AHI >5). The AHI at the final pressure on the PSG and the average AHI from the prescribed PAP device were compared. The results showed that in the majority (77.3%) of patients (126 of 163), the AHI from both PAP device and PSG correlated well and were in the same category (AHI ≤5 and AHI >5 respectively). The majority of patients (80.7%) with PSG AHI of <5 had PAP device AHI <5 as well. By contrast, if PSG AHI was >5, 61.5% patients reported good control, with AHI <5 on PAP device AHI. We conclude that in a majority of patients who were optimally titrated in the sleep laboratory, the PAP device continued to show optimal control at home.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 24%
Student > Master 3 14%
Other 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Researcher 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 6 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 14%
Neuroscience 2 10%
Psychology 1 5%
Engineering 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 26 July 2018.
All research outputs
#19,821,893
of 32,125,052 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#117,934
of 215,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,799
of 342,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,415
of 4,756 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,125,052 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 215,002 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.0. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 342,827 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,756 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.