↓ Skip to main content

Dive Risk Factors, Gas Bubble Formation, and Decompression Illness in Recreational SCUBA Diving: Analysis of DAN Europe DSL Data Base

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 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
Dive Risk Factors, Gas Bubble Formation, and Decompression Illness in Recreational SCUBA Diving: Analysis of DAN Europe DSL Data Base
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01587
Pubmed ID
Authors

Danilo Cialoni, Massimo Pieri, Costantino Balestra, Alessandro Marroni

Abstract

Introduction: The popularity of SCUBA diving is steadily increasing together with the number of dives and correlated diseases per year. The rules that govern correct decompression procedures are considered well known even if the majority of Decompression Sickness (DCS) cases are considered unexpected confirming a bias in the "mathematical ability" to predict DCS by the current algorithms. Furthermore, little is still known about diving risk factors and any individual predisposition to DCS. This study provides an in-depth epidemiological analysis of the diving community, to include additional risk factors correlated with the development of circulating bubbles and DCS. Materials and Methods: An originally developed database (DAN DB) including specific questionnaires for data collection allowed the statistical analysis of 39,099 electronically recorded open circuit dives made by 2,629 European divers (2,189 males 83.3%, 440 females 16.7%) over 5 years. The same dive parameters and risk factors were investigated also in 970 out of the 39,099 collected dives investigated for bubble formation, by 1-min precordial Doppler, and in 320 sea-level dives followed by DCS symptoms. Results: Mean depth and GF high of all the recorded dives were 27.1 m, and 0.66, respectively; the average ascent speed was lower than the currently recommended "safe" one (9-10 m/min). We found statistically significant relationships between higher bubble grades and BMI, fat mass, age, and diving exposure. Regarding incidence of DCS, we identified additional non-bubble related risk factors, which appear significantly related to a higher DCS incidence, namely: gender, strong current, heavy exercise, and workload during diving. We found that the majority of the recorded DCS cases were not predicted by the adopted decompression algorithm and would have therefore been defined as "undeserved." Conclusion: The DAN DB analysis shows that most dives were made in a "safe zone," even if data show an evident "gray area" in the "mathematical" ability to predict DCS by the current algorithms. Some other risk factors seem to influence the possibility to develop DCS, irrespective of their effect on bubble formation, thus suggesting the existence of some factors influencing or enhancing the effects of bubbles.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 110 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Researcher 10 9%
Student > Master 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 5%
Other 19 17%
Unknown 46 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 26%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 5%
Engineering 6 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 53 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 26 March 2023.
All research outputs
#3,872,009
of 23,477,147 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#6,740
of 31,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,314
of 319,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#186
of 588 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,477,147 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,289 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 319,205 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 588 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.