↓ Skip to main content

CT-derived Biomechanical Metrics Improve Agreement Between Spirometry and Emphysema

Overview of attention for article published in Academic Radiology, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
CT-derived Biomechanical Metrics Improve Agreement Between Spirometry and Emphysema
Published in
Academic Radiology, April 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.acra.2016.02.002
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Many patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have marked discordance between forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and degree of emphysema on computed tomography (CT). Biomechanical differences between these patients have not been studied. We aimed to identify reasons for the discordance between CT and spirometry in some patients with COPD. Subjects with Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease stages I-IV from a large multicenter study (The Genetic Epidemiology of COPD) were arranged by percentiles of %predicted FEV1 and emphysema on CT. Three categories were created using differences in percentiles: Catspir with predominant airflow obstruction/minimal emphysema, CatCT with predominant emphysema/minimal airflow obstruction, and Catmatched with matched FEV1 and emphysema. Image registration was used to derive Jacobian determinants, a measure of lung elasticity, anisotropy, and strain tensors, to assess biomechanical differences between groups. Regression models were created with the previously mentioned categories as outcome variable, adjusting for demographics, scanner type, quantitative CT-derived emphysema, gas trapping, and airway thickness (model 1), and after adding biomechanical CT metrics (model 2). Jacobian determinants, anisotropy, and strain tensors were strongly associated with FEV1. With Catmatched as control, model 2 predicted Catspir and CatCT better than model 1 (Akaike information criterion 255.8 vs. 320.8). In addition to demographics, the strongest independent predictors of FEV1 were Jacobian mean (β = 1.60,95%confidence intervals [CI] = 1.16 to 1.98; P < 0.001), coefficient of variation (CV) of Jacobian (β = 1.45,95%CI = 0.86 to 2.03; P < 0.001), and CV of strain (β = 1.82,95%CI = 0.68 to 2.95; P = 0.001). CVs of Jacobian and strain are both potential markers of biomechanical lung heterogeneity. CT-derived measures of lung mechanics improve the link between quantitative CT and spirometry, offering the potential for new insights into the linkage between regional parenchymal destruction and global decrement in lung function in patients with COPD.

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.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Master 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Other 3 6%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 14 30%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 17%
Engineering 6 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 9%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 17 36%
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 02 June 2026.
All research outputs
#11,573,277
of 32,876,213 outputs
Outputs from Academic Radiology
#1,331
of 3,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,259
of 330,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Academic Radiology
#16
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,876,213 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,045 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 330,871 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.