↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
76 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 comparison of CPAP and CPAPFLEX in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea in World Trade Center responders: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13063-015-0907-7
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Following the World Trade Center disaster, a large number of individuals involved in rescue and recovery activity were exposed to significant amounts of dust, and reported symptoms of chronic nasal and sinus inflammation. An unusually high prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) has also been observed in this World Trade Center Responder population. This project aims to examine the relationship between nasal pathology and OSA. Our hypothesis is that increased nasal resistance due to nasal inflammation predisposes to OSA in this population. Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) is the standard therapy for OSA but despite its efficacy has poor adherence. Subjects with high nasal resistance may have greater difficulty in tolerating this therapy than those who do not have high nasal resistance. Reduction of excess expiratory positive pressure by the modality known as Cflex™ during Continuous Positive Airway Pressure therapy (CPAPFlex) has been suggested to improve comfort without compromising efficacy. We will compare CPAP to CPAPFlex in subjects with OSA. Subjects with new onset habitual snoring will be screened for OSA using home sleep studies and rhinomanometry will be used to determine nasal resistance. In 400 subjects with OSA we will perform a randomized double blind cross-over study comparing CPAP to CPAPflex, and relate nasal resistance to adherence to CPAP therapy. This is the first multicenter trial designed to test the hypothesis that adherence to CPAP therapy relates to nasal resistance and CPAPFlex will improve adherence to CPAP in those subjects with high nasal resistance. We anticipate the following results from this trial: 1. Increased nasal resistance is associated with decreased adherence to CPAP therapy. 2. Use of CPAPFlex improves adherence with CPAP therapy in subjects with high nasal resistance, but not in those with low nasal resistance. 3. The benefit of CPAPFlex on adherence is greatest when offered at CPAP therapy initiation rather than as a "rescue" therapy in subjects with high nasal resistance. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01753999 , Date: 12 December 2012.

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 76 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 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 4 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 5%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 33 43%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 14%
Psychology 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 34 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 01 August 2022.
All research outputs
#7,147,471
of 33,083,482 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#2,191
of 7,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,554
of 296,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#44
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,083,482 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,237 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 296,798 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 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 66% of its contemporaries.