| Title |
COPD management: role of symptom assessment in routine clinical practice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/copd.s49392 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thys van der Molen, Marc Miravitlles, Janwillem WH Kocks |
| Abstract |
Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) present with a variety of symptoms that significantly impair health-related quality of life. Despite this, COPD treatment and its management are mainly based on lung function assessments. There is increasing evidence that conventional lung function measures alone do not correlate well with COPD symptoms and their associated impact on patients' everyday lives. Instead, symptoms should be assessed routinely, preferably by using patient-centered questionnaires that provide a more accurate guide to the actual burden of COPD. Numerous questionnaires have been developed in an attempt to find a simple and reliable tool to use in everyday clinical practice. In this paper, we review three such patient-reported questionnaires recommended by the latest Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease guidelines, ie, the modified Medical Research Council questionnaire, the clinical COPD questionnaire, and the COPD Assessment Test, as well as other symptom-specific questionnaires that are currently being developed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 136 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 14% |
| Other | 19 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 9% |
| Researcher | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 22 | 16% |
| Unknown | 42 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 43 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 24 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Psychology | 3 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 14 | 10% |
| Unknown | 47 | 34% |
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 13 October 2013.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#2,078
of 2,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,049
of 219,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#17
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 219,840 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.