↓ Skip to main content

Reference values for spirometry in elderly individuals: a cross-sectional study of different reference equations

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Reference values for spirometry in elderly individuals: a cross-sectional study of different reference equations
Published in
Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40248-017-0112-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joana Belo, Teresa Palmeiro, Iolanda Caires, Ana L. Papoila, Marta Alves, Pedro Carreiro-Martins, Maria A. Botelho, Nuno Neuparth

Abstract

Spirometry is the single most important test for the evaluation of respiratory function. The results are interpreted by comparing measured data with predicted values previously obtained from a reference population. Reference equations for spirometry have been discussed previously. The aim of this study was to compare reference values based on National Health and Nutrition Assessment Survey (NHANES III), European Community of Steel and Coal (ECSC), and Global Lung Initiative (GLI) equations in an elderly sample population. Subjects from the Geriatric Study on Health Effects of Air Quality in elder care centres who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled. Spirometry was performed according to international guidelines. The forced vital capacity, forced expiratory volume in 1 s, and FEV1/FVC ratio were reported as percentages of the predicted value, and the lower limit of normality was calculated. Out of 260 elderly patients, 69.6% were women; the mean age was 83.0 ± 6.46 years with an age range of 65-95 years. The lowest %FVC and %FEV1 values were obtained using the GLI reference equations. However, when NHANES III equations were used, the FEV1/FVC ratio was higher than ratios obtained from GLI and ECSC equations. The prevalence of airway obstruction was highest using ECSC equations, while GLI equations demonstrated more restrictive defects. The present study showed meaningful differences in the reference values, and consequently, in the results obtained using NHANES III, ECSC, and GLI reference equations. The spirometry interpretation was also influenced by the reference equations used.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Other 10 22%
Unknown 14 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 17 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 28 November 2022.
All research outputs
#4,838,109
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine
#73
of 307 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,356
of 450,867 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 307 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 450,867 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.