↓ Skip to main content

Clinical predictors of chronic rhinosinusitis: do the Canadian clinical practice guidelines for acute and chronic rhinosinusitis predict CT-confirmation of disease?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 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
Clinical predictors of chronic rhinosinusitis: do the Canadian clinical practice guidelines for acute and chronic rhinosinusitis predict CT-confirmation of disease?
Published in
Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40463-017-0243-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paige Moore, Brian Blakley, Eric Meen

Abstract

The diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) based on clinical presentation alone remains challenging. To improve the accuracy of clinical diagnosis, the Canadian Rhinosinusitis Guidelines recommend the use of specific symptom and endoscopic criteria. Our study objective was to determine whether symptom and endoscopic criteria, as defined by the Canadian Rhinosinusitis Guidelines, accurately predict CT-confirmed CRS diagnosis. A retrospective cohort study of 126 patients who underwent CT sinuses based on clinical suspicion of possible CRS. The presence of symptom and endoscopic criteria, as defined by the Canadian Rhinosinusitis Guidelines, were compared between patients with and without a CT-confirmed CRS diagnosis using two-tailed Fisher's exact tests. Positive predictive values and likelihood ratios were determined for each symptom and endoscopic finding. Overall, 56.3% of patients had a CT-confirmed diagnosis of CRS. With the exception of nasal polyps, none of the symptom or endoscopic criteria had a statistically significant correlation with positive CT sinuses. For symptom criteria, positive predictive values ranged from 52.4% to 63.4%; likelihood ratios ranged from 0.85 to 1.34. For endoscopic criteria, positive predictive values and likelihood ratios were 71.4% and 1.94 (edema); 63.0% and 1.32 (discharge); and 92.9% and 10.1 (nasal polyps). 35.2% of patients with CT-confirmed CRS had normal endoscopic exams. The Canadian Rhinosinusitis Guidelines' symptom and endoscopic criteria for CRS, with the exception of nasal polyps on endoscopy, do not accurately predict CT-confirmed disease. In addition, a normal endoscopic exam does not rule out CRS.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 4 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Other 1 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Librarian 1 7%
Other 3 20%
Unknown 3 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 53%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 7%
Chemistry 1 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Unknown 4 27%

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 06 December 2017.
All research outputs
#14,703,374
of 16,669,654 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery
#256
of 328 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#348,714
of 414,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery
#29
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,669,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 328 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 414,889 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.