↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Why are some evidence-based care recommendations in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease better implemented than others? Perspectives of medical practitioners

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
Title
Why are some evidence-based care recommendations in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease better implemented than others? Perspectives of medical practitioners
Published in
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, December 2011
DOI 10.2147/copd.s26581
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kylie Johnston, Young, Karen Grimmer- Somers, Antic, Frith

Abstract

Clinical guidelines for management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) include recommendations based on high levels of evidence, but gaps exist in their implementation. The aim of this study was to examine the perspectives of medical practitioners regarding implementation of six high-evidence recommendations for the management of people with COPD.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 87 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 16%
Researcher 12 13%
Other 6 7%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Other 22 24%
Unknown 13 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 11%
Social Sciences 9 10%
Psychology 8 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 16 18%

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 01 February 2012.
All research outputs
#11,069,258
of 12,450,995 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#1,414
of 1,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,023
of 120,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#32
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,450,995 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,517 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 120,268 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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.