↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Prevalence of swallowing dysfunction screened in Swedish cohort of COPD patients

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, January 2017
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
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
Title
Prevalence of swallowing dysfunction screened in Swedish cohort of COPD patients
Published in
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, January 2017
DOI 10.2147/copd.s120207
Pubmed ID
Authors

Margareta Gonzalez Lindh, Monica Blom Johansson, Margareta Jennische, Hirsh Koyi

Abstract

COPD is a common problem associated with morbidity and mortality. COPD may also affect the dynamics and coordination of functions such as swallowing. A misdirected swallow may, in turn, result in the bolus entering the airway. A growing body of evidence suggests that a subgroup of people with COPD is prone to oropharyngeal dysphagia. The aim of this study was to evaluate swallowing dysfunction in patients with stable COPD and to determine the relation between signs and symptoms of swallowing dysfunction and lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 second percent predicted). Fifty-one patients with COPD in a stable phase participated in a questionnaire survey, swallowing tests, and spirometry. A post-bronchodilator ratio of the forced expiratory volume in 1 second/best of forced vital capacity and vital capacity <0.7 was used to define COPD. Swallowing function was assessed by a questionnaire and two swallowing tests (water and cookie swallow tests). Sixty-five percent of the patients reported subjective signs and symptoms of swallowing dysfunction in the questionnaire and 49% showed measurable ones in the swallowing tests. For the combined subjective and objective findings, 78% had a coexisting swallowing dysfunction. No significant difference was found between male and female patients. Swallowing function is affected in COPD patients with moderate to severe airflow limitation, and the signs and symptoms of this swallowing dysfunction were subjective, objective, or both.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 17%
Other 7 15%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Professor 2 4%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 17 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 13%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Psychology 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 20 43%
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 06 November 2017.
All research outputs
#16,188,873
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#1,470
of 2,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#243,318
of 422,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#52
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 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 2,571 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 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 422,901 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.