↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Beyond FEV1 in COPD: a review of patient-reported outcomes and their measurement

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
168 Mendeley
Title
Beyond FEV<sub>1</sub> in COPD: a review of patient-reported outcomes and their measurement
Published in
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, October 2012
DOI 10.2147/copd.s32675
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul Jones, Marc Miravitlles, Thys van der Molen, Karoly Kulich

Abstract

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) present with a variety of symptoms and pathological consequences. Although primarily viewed as a respiratory disease, COPD has both pulmonary and extrapulmonary effects, which have an impact on many aspects of physical, emotional, and mental well-being. Traditional assessment of COPD relies heavily on measuring lung function, specifically forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)). However, the evidence suggests that FEV(1) is a relatively poor correlate of symptoms such as breathlessness and the impact of COPD on daily life. Furthermore, many consequences of the disease, including anxiety and depression and the ability to perform daily activities, can only be described and reported reliably by the patient. Thus, in order to provide a comprehensive view of the effects of interventions in clinical trials, it is essential that spirometry is accompanied by assessments using patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments. We provide an overview of patient-reported outcome concepts in COPD, such as breathlessness, physical functioning, and health status, and evaluate the tools used for measuring these concepts. Particular attention is given to the newly developed instruments emerging in response to recent regulatory guidelines for the development and use of PROs in clinical trials. We conclude that although data from the development and validation of these new PRO instruments are emerging, to build the body of evidence that supports the use of a new instrument takes many years. Furthermore, new instruments do not necessarily have better discriminative or evaluative properties than older instruments. The development of new PRO tools, however, is crucial, not only to ensure that key COPD concepts are being reliably measured but also that the relevant treatment effects are being captured in clinical trials. In turn, this will help us to understand better the patient's experience of the disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 168 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 163 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 14%
Student > Master 22 13%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Other 13 8%
Other 30 18%
Unknown 37 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 72 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 8%
Psychology 9 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Other 19 11%
Unknown 43 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 02 January 2016.
All research outputs
#16,046,765
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#1,485
of 2,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,486
of 190,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#12
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,577 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 190,982 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.