↓ Skip to main content

Admission prevention in COPD: non-pharmacological management

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 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
Admission prevention in COPD: non-pharmacological management
Published in
BMC Medicine, November 2013
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-11-247
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eui-Sik Suh, Swapna Mandal, Nicholas Hart

Abstract

Exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are one of the commonest causes of hospital admission in Europe, Australasia, and North America. These adverse events have a large effect on the health status of the patients and impose a heavy burden on healthcare systems. While we acknowledge the contribution of pharmacotherapies to exacerbation prevention, our interpretation of the data is that exacerbations continue to be a major burden to individuals and healthcare systems, therefore, there remains great scope for other therapies to influence exacerbation frequency and preservation of quality of life. In this review, the benefits and limitations of pulmonary rehabilitation, non-invasive ventilation, smoking cessation, and long-term oxygen therapy are discussed. In addition, supported discharge, advanced care coordination, and telehealth programs to improve clinical outcome are reviewed as future directions for the management of COPD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 124 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Researcher 10 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 30 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 19%
Psychology 6 5%
Engineering 4 3%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Other 9 7%
Unknown 33 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 2022.
All research outputs
#2,933,597
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,773
of 3,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,154
of 306,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#38
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,569 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 306,092 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.