↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

The concept of control of COPD in clinical practice

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
The concept of control of COPD in clinical practice
Published in
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, December 2014
DOI 10.2147/copd.s71370
Pubmed ID
Authors

Juan José Soler-Cataluña, Bernardino Alcázar-Navarrete, Marc Miravitlles

Abstract

Treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) requires a personalized approach according to the clinical characteristics of the patients, the level of severity, and the response to the different therapies. Furthermore, patients with the same level of severity measured by the degree of airflow obstruction or even with multidimensional indices may have very different symptoms and limitations for daily activities. The concept of control has been extensively developed in asthma but has not been defined in COPD. Here, we propose a definition of COPD control based on the concepts of impact and stability. Impact is a cross-sectional concept that can be measured by questionnaires such as the COPD Assessment Test or the Clinical COPD Questionnaire. Alternatively, impact can be assessed by the degree of dyspnea, the use of rescue medication, the level of physical activity, and sputum color. Stability is a longitudinal concept that requires the absence of exacerbations and deterioration in the aforementioned variables or in the COPD Assessment Test or Clinical COPD Questionnaire scores. Control is defined by low impact (adjusted for severity) and stability. The concept of control in COPD can be useful in the decision making regarding an increase or decrease in medication in the stable state.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 4%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 42 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Researcher 5 11%
Other 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 7 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 40%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 9 20%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 November 2019.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#1,731
of 2,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,833
of 369,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#21
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 369,133 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.