↓ Skip to main content

Respiratory care in familial dysautonomia: Systematic review and expert consensus recommendations

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Medicine, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
155 Mendeley
Title
Respiratory care in familial dysautonomia: Systematic review and expert consensus recommendations
Published in
Respiratory Medicine, June 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.rmed.2018.06.017
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mikhail Kazachkov, Jose-Alberto Palma, Lucy Norcliffe-Kaufmann, Bat-El Bar-Aluma, Christy L Spalink, Erin P Barnes, Nancy E Amoroso, Stamatela M Balou, Shay Bess, Arun Chopra, Rany Condos, Ori Efrati, Kathryn Fitzgerald, David Fridman, Ronald M Goldenberg, Ayelet Goldhaber, David A Kaufman, Sanjeev V Kothare, Jeremiah Levine, Joseph Levy, Anthony S Lubinsky, Channa Maayan, Libia C Moy, Pedro J Rivera, Alcibiades J Rodriguez, Gil Sokol, Mark F Sloane, Tina Tan, Horacio Kaufmann

Abstract

Familial dysautonomia (Riley-Day syndrome, hereditary sensory autonomic neuropathy type-III) is a rare genetic disease caused by impaired development of sensory and afferent autonomic nerves. As a consequence, patients develop neurogenic dysphagia with frequent aspiration, chronic lung disease, and chemoreflex failure leading to severe sleep disordered breathing. The purpose of these guidelines is to provide recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of respiratory disorders in familial dysautonomia. We performed a systematic review to summarize the evidence related to our questions. When evidence was not sufficient, we used data from the New York University Familial Dysautonomia Patient Registry, a database containing ongoing prospective comprehensive clinical data from 670 cases. The evidence was summarized and discussed by a multidisciplinary panel of experts. Evidence-based and expert recommendations were then formulated, written, and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were formulated for or against specific diagnostic tests and clinical interventions. Diagnostic tests reviewed included radiological evaluation, dysphagia evaluation, gastroesophageal evaluation, bronchoscopy and bronchoalveolar lavage, pulmonary function tests, laryngoscopy and polysomnography. Clinical interventions and therapies reviewed included prevention and management of aspiration, airway mucus clearance and chest physical therapy, viral respiratory infections, precautions during high altitude or air-flight travel, non-invasive ventilation during sleep, antibiotic therapy, steroid therapy, oxygen therapy, gastrostomy tube placement, Nissen fundoplication surgery, scoliosis surgery, tracheostomy and lung lobectomy. Expert recommendations for the diagnosis and management of respiratory disease in patients with familial dysautonomia are provided. Frequent reassessment and updating will be needed.

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 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 155 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 17%
Other 12 8%
Student > Postgraduate 11 7%
Researcher 10 6%
Student > Master 10 6%
Other 30 19%
Unknown 56 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 6%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Neuroscience 4 3%
Other 18 12%
Unknown 65 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 15 September 2023.
All research outputs
#6,932,988
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Medicine
#1,294
of 3,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,693
of 341,505 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Medicine
#16
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,571 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 341,505 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 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 64% of its contemporaries.