↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

The use of the practice walk test in pulmonary rehabilitation program: National COPD Audit Pulmonary Rehabilitation Workstream

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, September 2017
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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
22 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
The use of the practice walk test in pulmonary rehabilitation program: National COPD Audit Pulmonary Rehabilitation Workstream
Published in
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, September 2017
DOI 10.2147/copd.s141620
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ali Hakamy, Tricia M McKeever, Michael C Steiner, C Michael Roberts, Sally J Singh, Charlotte E Bolton

Abstract

Our aim was to evaluate the use and impact of the practice walk test on enrolment, completion, and clinical functional response to pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) using the 2015 UK National Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Pulmonary Rehabilitation audit data. Patients were assessed according to whether a baseline practice walk test was performed or not. Study outcomes included use of the practice walk test, baseline and change in incremental shuttle walk test distance (ISWD) or 6-minute walk test distance (6MWD), and enrolment to and completion of PR program. Of 7,355 patients, only 1,666 (22.6%) had a baseline practice test. At baseline, the practice walk test group walked further as compared to the no practice walk test group: ISWD, 17.9 m [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.2-27.5 m] and 6MWD, 34.8 m (95% CI 24.7-44.9 m). The practice walk test group were 2.2 times (95% CI 1.8-2.6) more likely to enroll and 17% (95% CI 1.03-1.34) more likely to complete PR. Although the change in ISWD and 6MWD with PR was lower in the practice walk test group, they walked further at discharge assessment. Only 22.6% of the patients in the 2015 National PR audit had a practice walk test at assessment. Those who did had better enrolment, completion, and better baseline walking distance, from which the prescription is set.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 17%
Student > Postgraduate 4 17%
Other 2 9%
Researcher 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 7 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 8 35%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Sports and Recreations 1 4%
Chemistry 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 19 April 2018.
All research outputs
#2,286,721
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#205
of 2,578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,430
of 324,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#9
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,578 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 324,453 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.