↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Biomarkers in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: confusing or useful?

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
Title
Biomarkers in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: confusing or useful?
Published in
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, February 2014
DOI 10.2147/copd.s42362
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert Stockley

Abstract

The field of biomarker research has almost reached unmanageable proportions in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The developments of new technology platforms have generated a huge information data base, both cross sectionally and increasingly, longitudinally. The knowledge emerging provides an enormous potential for understanding the disease pathophysiology, for developing markers specific for long-term outcomes, and for developing new therapeutic strategies. However, the excitement must be tempered with an understanding of the limitations of the data collection techniques, and of the variations in disease state, activity, impact, and progression. Nevertheless, the most crucial aspect in interpreting the current literature is the recognition of the relatively superficial characterization of what is a complex group of pathological processes with a common end point of airflow limitation. The current review explores some of these issues together with those areas where real progress appears to have been made, and provides caution on interpretation.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Unknown 58 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Student > Master 9 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Other 6 10%
Other 14 23%
Unknown 5 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 8 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 14 July 2017.
All research outputs
#1,067,451
of 12,450,995 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#129
of 1,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,641
of 201,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#1
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,450,995 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,517 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 201,436 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them