↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Pragmatic research and outcomes in asthma and COPD

Overview of attention for article published in Pragmatic and Observational Research, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
Pragmatic research and outcomes in asthma and COPD
Published in
Pragmatic and Observational Research, April 2012
DOI 10.2147/por.s16671
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gene L Colice

Abstract

Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are common diseases which cause patients and society considerable difficulties. These are costly diseases which cause substantial morbidity and death. Health care policy makers have made improving outcomes in asthma and COPD a priority. Application of guideline recommended approaches to asthma and COPD care in the real-life setting has been emphasized but outcomes have not improved. Failure to improve outcomes may not be because of inconsistent applications of guideline recommendations, but rather because there are difficulties implementing the Expert Panel Report III (EPR 3) method for categorizing asthma severity and the Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) method for diagnosing COPD. As these serve as the foundation for treatment recommendations for these diseases, alternative approaches should be considered for categorizing asthma severity and identifying COPD patients. Claims-based algorithms provide an intriguing option for identifying persistent asthma patients and symptomatic COPD patients in administrative databases. These methods could be used as the basis for pragmatic research, both retrospective and prospective, on assessing outcomes of guideline recommended treatment approaches in asthma and COPD. Important questions urgently need to be answered about how guideline recommended approaches regarding use of long-acting inhaled β-agonist/inhaled corticosteroid (LABA/ICS) in asthma and long-acting inhaled anti-muscarinic agent (LAMA) and LABA/ICS in COPD affect outcomes in real-life situations.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 23%
Researcher 3 23%
Unspecified 1 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Other 2 15%
Unknown 2 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 31%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 8%
Unspecified 1 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Computer Science 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 38%
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 18 April 2012.
All research outputs
#20,964,263
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from Pragmatic and Observational Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,980
of 173,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pragmatic and Observational Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,748,735 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 1 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 0.5. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
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 173,732 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them