| Title |
Sex differences in use of inhalants by elderly patients with asthma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Interventions in Aging, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cia.s84271 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Masahiro Hirose, Rieko Kondo, Naoaki Ban, Kazunobu Kuwabara, Mamoru Shiga, Takahiko Horiguchi |
| Abstract |
The number of elderly patients with asthma has been increasing in Japan. Treatment for these patients should be provided based on the condition of individual patients. This study was performed to clarify the relationship between inhalation procedure and sex difference in elderly patients with asthma. The inhalation procedure was examined in 155 elderly patients with asthma (male: n=66, average age ± standard deviation: 75.5±5.65 years old; female: n=89, average age ± standard deviation: 78.7±6.87 years old) during a medical examination. For the three items that were common to all devices, the percentages of the 155 patients who could/could not perform the actions were examined by separate Fisher's exact tests for males and females. A statistically significant difference (P=0.007) was observed for "breath holding", and more females than males were not able to hold their breath. Although no significant difference was seen in the "accurate number of times of inhalation", females tended to not be able to inhale accurately compared to males (P=0.072). Our results suggest that elderly female patients with asthma have less understanding of inhaled steroid therapy, compared to elderly male patients. Therefore, it is particularly important to confirm that the correct inhalation procedure is used by elderly female patients with asthma. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 13 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 21% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 14% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 2 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 14% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 14% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 4 | 29% |
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 20 April 2016.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#1,255
of 1,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,173
of 276,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#28
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 276,425 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.