↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Reliability and validity of the test of incremental respiratory endurance measures of inspiratory muscle performance in COPD

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
Title
Reliability and validity of the test of incremental respiratory endurance measures of inspiratory muscle performance in COPD
Published in
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, May 2018
DOI 10.2147/copd.s160512
Pubmed ID
Authors

Magno F Formiga, Kathryn E Roach, Isabel Vital, Gisel Urdaneta, Kira Balestrini, Rafael A Calderon-Candelario, Michael A Campos, Lawrence P Cahalin

Abstract

The Test of Incremental Respiratory Endurance (TIRE) provides a comprehensive assessment of inspiratory muscle performance by measuring maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) over time. The integration of MIP over inspiratory duration (ID) provides the sustained maximal inspiratory pressure (SMIP). Evidence on the reliability and validity of these measurements in COPD is not currently available. Therefore, we assessed the reliability, responsiveness and construct validity of the TIRE measures of inspiratory muscle performance in subjects with COPD. Test-retest reliability, known-groups and convergent validity assessments were implemented simultaneously in 81 male subjects with mild to very severe COPD. TIRE measures were obtained using the portable PrO2 device, following standard guidelines. All TIRE measures were found to be highly reliable, with SMIP demonstrating the strongest test-retest reliability with a nearly perfect intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.99, while MIP and ID clustered closely together behind SMIP with ICC values of about 0.97. Our findings also demonstrated known-groups validity of all TIRE measures, with SMIP and ID yielding larger effect sizes when compared to MIP in distinguishing between subjects of different COPD status. Finally, our analyses confirmed convergent validity for both SMIP and ID, but not MIP. The TIRE measures of MIP, SMIP and ID have excellent test-retest reliability and demonstrated known-groups validity in subjects with COPD. SMIP and ID also demonstrated evidence of moderate convergent validity and appear to be more stable measures in this patient population than the traditional MIP.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Researcher 6 10%
Professor 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 16 25%
Unknown 16 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 21 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 27%
Unspecified 2 3%
Sports and Recreations 2 3%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 18 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 17 November 2020.
All research outputs
#14,393,794
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#1,185
of 2,578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,367
of 339,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#39
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,578 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 339,234 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 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.