| Title |
COPD depicted – patients drawing their lungs
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/copd.s139896 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ad A Kaptein, Jitske Tiemensma, Elizabeth Broadbent, Guus M Asijee, Maarten Voorhaar |
| Abstract |
Given the increasing importance of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in quality medical care, we examined the value and feasibility of an innovative method for assessing patients' illness perceptions, represented in drawings made by patients with COPD of their lungs. The aim of our study was: to study patients' representation of COPD as reflected in their drawings of their lungs; and to examine scores on a validated measure that assesses illness perceptions (ie, Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire [B-IPQ]). One hundred outpatients with COPD, mean age 70 years, selected from a pharmacy database, participated and 98 filled out the B-IPQ. Eighty-seven patients completed the drawing task. The illness perceptions as reflected in the responses to the B-IPQ scales represented a quite optimistic view of COPD and its consequences. The drawings of the lungs reflected a considerable discordance between patients' representations and medically accepted representations of lungs of a person with COPD. Assessing illness perceptions in clinical care and research about COPD offers opportunities to identify goals for patient education and self-management. Inviting patients to draw their illness is an innovative and promising approach to assessing PRO. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 8 | 33% |
| Australia | 2 | 8% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 11 | 46% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 54% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 25% |
| Scientists | 5 | 21% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 14 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 14% |
| Psychology | 5 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 11% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 15 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 11 November 2019.
All research outputs
#2,062,311
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#167
of 2,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,176
of 341,375 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#5
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 341,375 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.