↓ Skip to main content

Bronchial provocation tests in clinical practice

Overview of attention for article published in Sao Paulo Medical Journal, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
Bronchial provocation tests in clinical practice
Published in
Sao Paulo Medical Journal, January 2011
DOI 10.1590/s1516-31802011000400008
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marcos de Carvalho Borges, Erica Ferraz, Elcio Oliveira Vianna

Abstract

Bronchial hyperresponsiveness, which consists of an exaggerated response of the airways to bronchoconstrictor stimuli, is one of the main characteristics of asthma, presented in nearly all asthmatic patients. Bronchial hyperresponsiveness may also be present in other diseases, such as allergic rhinitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cystic fibrosis, heart failure and respiratory infection, and with some medications, such as β-blockers. Bronchial provocation tests (also known as bronchial challenges) are used to evaluate bronchial responsiveness. These tests have become increasingly used over the last 20 years, with the development and validation of accurate, safe and reproducible tests, and with the publication of well-detailed protocols. Several stimuli can be used in a bronchial challenge, and they are classified as direct and indirect stimuli. There are many indications for a bronchial challenge. In this review, we discuss the main differences between direct and indirect stimuli, and the use of bronchial challenges in clinical practice, especially for confirming diagnoses of asthma, exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and cough-variant asthma, and for use among elite-level athletes.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 8%
Student > Postgraduate 1 4%
Unknown 22 88%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 4%
Unknown 22 88%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 30 October 2017.
All research outputs
#7,259,232
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from Sao Paulo Medical Journal
#10
of 13 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,237
of 193,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sao Paulo Medical Journal
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one scored the same or higher as 3 of them.
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 193,421 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 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