↓ Skip to main content

Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy in cystic fibrosis: dose, variability and coefficient of fat absorption.

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Española de Enfermedades Digestivas, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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.
Title
Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy in cystic fibrosis: dose, variability and coefficient of fat absorption.
Published in
Revista Española de Enfermedades Digestivas, January 2017
DOI 10.17235/reed.2017.4951/2017
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joaquim Calvo-Lerma, Sandra Martínez-Barona, Etna Masip, Victoria Fornés, Carmen Ribes-Koninckx

Abstract

Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) remains a backbone in the nutritional treatment of cystic fibrosis. Currently, there is a lack of an evidence-based tool that allows dose adjustment. To date, no studies have found an association between PERT dose and fat absorption. Therefore, the aim of the study was to assess the influence of both the PERT dose and the variability in this dose on the coefficient of fat absorption (CFA). This is a retrospective longitudinal study of 16 pediatric patients (192 food records) with three consecutive visits to the hospital over a twelve-month period. Dietary fat intake and PERT were assessed via a four-day food record and fat content in stools was determined by means of a three-day stool sample collection. A beta regression model was built to explain the association between the CFA and the interaction between the PERT dose (lipase units [LU]/g dietary fat) and the variability in the PERT dose (standard deviation [SD]). The coefficient of fat absorption increased with the PERT dose when the variability in the dose was low. In contrast, even at the highest PERT dose values, the CFA decreased when the variability was high. The confidence interval suggested an association, although the analysis was not statistically significant. The variability in the PERT dose adjustment should be taken into consideration when performing studies on PERT efficiency. A clinical goal should be the maintenance of a constant PERT dose rather than trying to obtain an optimal value.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Student > Master 5 10%
Researcher 5 10%
Other 3 6%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 17 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 20 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 12 August 2020.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Revista Española de Enfermedades Digestivas
#365
of 891 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,895
of 421,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Española de Enfermedades Digestivas
#20
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 891 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 421,709 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 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 58% of its contemporaries.