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 |
Persistent Systemic Inflammation is Associated with Poor Clinical Outcomes in COPD: A Novel Phenotype
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0037483 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alvar Agustí, Lisa D. Edwards, Stephen I. Rennard, William MacNee, Ruth Tal-Singer, Bruce E. Miller, Jørgen Vestbo, David A. Lomas, Peter M. A. Calverley, Emiel Wouters, Courtney Crim, Julie C. Yates, Edwin K. Silverman, Harvey O. Coxson, Per Bakke, Ruth J. Mayer, Bartolome Celli |
| Abstract |
Because chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a heterogeneous condition, the identification of specific clinical phenotypes is key to developing more effective therapies. To explore if the persistence of systemic inflammation is associated with poor clinical outcomes in COPD we assessed patients recruited to the well-characterized ECLIPSE cohort (NCT00292552). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 3 | 38% |
| Spain | 2 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 38% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 343 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 2 | <1% |
| Vietnam | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 332 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 59 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 49 | 14% |
| Other | 28 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 28 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 21 | 6% |
| Other | 80 | 23% |
| Unknown | 78 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 152 | 44% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 18 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 13 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 3% |
| Other | 42 | 12% |
| Unknown | 90 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 April 2024.
All research outputs
#829,332
of 25,652,464 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#10,949
of 223,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,084
of 176,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#144
of 3,878 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,652,464 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 223,959 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 176,852 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,878 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.