↓ Skip to main content

The respiratory research agenda in primary care in Portugal: a Delphi study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Primary Care, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
The respiratory research agenda in primary care in Portugal: a Delphi study
Published in
BMC Primary Care, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12875-016-0512-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vera Araújo, Pedro M. Teixeira, John Yaphe, Jaime Correia de Sousa

Abstract

A research agenda can help to stimulate and guide research. The International Primary Care Respiratory Group (IPCRG) published a Research Needs Statement (RNS) in 2010 in which 145 research questions were identified. In 2012, priorities for respiratory research were established, based on these questions. To date, there has been no statement on primary care respiratory research needs in Portugal. The aim of the study was to develop a national consensus on research priorities in respiratory diseases in primary care in Portugal and to assess the applicability of the priorities for respiratory research set by the IPCRG. We conducted a Delphi study by electronic mail with a panel of experts on respiratory disease from primary and secondary care in Portugal. In the first round, the research needs in respiratory disease in Portugal were identified. In the second round, 196 research questions in six disease areas, derived from the first round and from the IPCRG Respiratory needs statement, were prioritised on a five-point Likert-type scale. In the third round, the questions were prioritized again with feed-back provided on the median scores for each item in the second round. Consensus was considered to have been reached when 80 % of the participants gave a score of 4 or 5 out of five on a given item. The 40 experts identified 121 respiratory research questions in Round 1 and expressed their views on 196 questions in Rounds 2 and 3. Twelve research questions (6 %) reached consensus. There were five questions in the asthma domain on early diagnosis, pulmonary function tests, the use of inhalers, and adherence to treatment. There were four questions in the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease domain on vaccinations, on routine monitoring and evaluation of treatment, on diagnosis, and on adherence to treatments. There was one question in the smoking domain on the effects of brief counselling. There were two questions on respiratory tract infections on the treatment of children and on the prescription of antibiotics. An additional 23 research questions (12 %) achieved consensus between 75 and 79 %. The results reflect the Portuguese reality in response the international agenda for research on respiratory diseases published by the IPCRG. They can support the development of future respiratory disease research in Portugal.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Other 5 10%
Researcher 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 16 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 12%
Psychology 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 21 41%
Attention Score in Context

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 15 March 2017.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,889
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#257,855
of 348,500 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#45
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 348,500 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.