↓ Skip to main content

Is Gastroparesis Found More Frequently in Patients with Cystic Fibrosis? A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Scientifica, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
23 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
Is Gastroparesis Found More Frequently in Patients with Cystic Fibrosis? A Systematic Review
Published in
Scientifica, May 2016
DOI 10.1155/2016/2918139
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is associated with different gastrointestinal motility disturbances and syndromes. We aim to assess gastric emptying in patients with CF compared to healthy controls by a systematic review of existing literature. Medical databases and abstracts from major gastroenterology and CF meetings were reviewed. Emptying times in CF patients were compared with healthy controls using random effects models. Subgroup analysis stratified results by age and diagnostic modality. Nineteen studies from 7 countries included 574 subjects (359 CF patients and 215 controls). Using pooled analysis frequency of gastroparesis was high (38%, 95% CI 30-45%) but results were highly dependent on the diagnostic modality. Delayed gastric emptying is more common in CF compared to general population. Scintigraphy identified rapid gastric emptying in a subgroup of CF patients, but this finding disappeared with adequate pancreatic enzyme replacement and after other diagnostic modalities were included.

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.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 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 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 13%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 6 26%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 43%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 9%
Neuroscience 2 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Unknown 8 35%
Attention Score in Context

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 20 August 2016.
All research outputs
#16,046,765
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Scientifica
#153
of 318 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,486
of 352,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientifica
#13
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 318 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 352,978 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 65% of its contemporaries.