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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Pre-flight evaluation of adult patients with cystic fibrosis: a cross-sectional study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-017-2386-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elisabeth Edvardsen, Aina Akerø, Ole Henning Skjønsberg, Bjørn Skrede |
| Abstract |
Air travel may imply a health hazard for patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) due to hypobaric environment in the aircraft cabin. The objective was to identify pre-flight variables, which might predict severe hypoxaemia in adult CF patients during air travel. Thirty adult CF-patients underwent pre-flight evaluation with spirometry, arterial oxygen tension (PaO2), pulse oximetry (SpO2) and cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) at sea level (SL). The results were related to the PaO2 obtained during a hypoxia-altitude simulation test (HAST) in which a cabin altitude of 2438 m (8000 ft) was simulated by breathing 15.1% oxygen. Four patients fulfilled the criteria for supplemental oxygen during air travel (PaO2 HAST < 6.6 kPa). While walking slowly during HAST, another eleven patients dropped below PaO2 HAST 6.6 kPa. Variables obtained during CPET (PaO2 CPET, SpO2 CPET, minute ventilation/carbon dioxide output, maximal oxygen uptake) showed the strongest correlation to PaO2 HAST. Exercise testing might be of value for predicting in-flight hypoxaemia and thus the need for supplemental oxygen during air travel in CF patients. Trial registration The study is retrospectively listed in the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration System: NCT01569880 (date; 30/3/2012). |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 33% |
| Mexico | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 16% |
| Researcher | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 11 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 39% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 13 | 34% |
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 08 February 2017.
All research outputs
#13,436,577
of 22,952,268 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,671
of 4,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,054
of 420,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#29
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,952,268 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,281 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 420,377 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 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 54% of its contemporaries.