↓ Skip to main content

Differences in classification of COPD group using COPD assessment test (CAT) or modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea scores: a cross-sectional analyses

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pulmonary Medicine, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Differences in classification of COPD group using COPD assessment test (CAT) or modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea scores: a cross-sectional analyses
Published in
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, June 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2466-13-35
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sunmin Kim, Jisun Oh, Yu-Il Kim, Hee-Jung Ban, Yong-Soo Kwon, In-Jae Oh, Kyu-Sik Kim, Young-Chul Kim, Sung-Chul Lim

Abstract

The GOLD 2011 document proposed a new classification system for COPD combining symptom assessment by COPD assessment test (CAT) or modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea scores, and exacerbation risk. We postulated that classification of COPD would be different by the symptom scale; CAT vs mMRC.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 92 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 19%
Student > Master 12 13%
Researcher 11 12%
Other 11 12%
Professor 9 10%
Other 26 28%
Unknown 7 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 51%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 2%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 14 15%

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 07 June 2013.
All research outputs
#2,015,627
of 3,630,432 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#192
of 321 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,618
of 85,370 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#10
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 3,630,432 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 321 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 85,370 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.