↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

A simple and rapid test of physical performance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
Title
A simple and rapid test of physical performance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Published in
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, August 2016
DOI 10.2147/copd.s106151
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ali Mufraih Albarrati, Nichola S Gale, Stephanie Enright, Margaret M Munnery, John R Cockcroft, Dennis J Shale

Abstract

Impaired physical performance is common in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but its assessment can be difficult in routine clinical practice. We compared the timed up and go (TUG) test and other easily applied assessments of physical performance with the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD). In a longitudinal study of comorbidities in COPD, submaximal physical performance was determined in 520 patients and 150 controls using the TUG test and 6MWD. Spirometry, body composition, handgrip strength, the COPD assessment test, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and the modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea scale were also determined. Patients and controls were similar in age, body mass index, and sex proportions. The TUG in the patients was greater than that in the control group, P=0.001, and was inversely related to 6MWD (r=-0.71, P<0.001) and forced expiratory volume in one second predicted (r=-0.19, P<0.01) and was directly related to the SGRQ activity (r=0.39, P<0.001), SGRQ total (r=0.37, P<0.001), and total COPD assessment test scores (r=0.37, P<0.001). The TUG identified the difference in physical performance between patients and controls. The TUG test and validated questionnaires provide a measure of physical performance, which is rapid and could be used in clinical practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 91 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Student > Postgraduate 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 35 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 14 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 14%
Sports and Recreations 4 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 46 51%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 08 June 2023.
All research outputs
#6,996,733
of 25,576,275 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#784
of 2,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,362
of 381,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#35
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,275 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 381,680 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 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 65% of its contemporaries.