↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Brazilian studies on pulmonary function in COPD patients: what are the gaps?

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
Brazilian studies on pulmonary function in COPD patients: what are the gaps?
Published in
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, July 2016
DOI 10.2147/copd.s54328
Pubmed ID
Authors

Agnaldo José Lopes, Pedro Lopes de Melo

Abstract

COPD is a major cause of death and morbidity worldwide, and is characterized by persistent airflow obstruction. The evaluation of obstruction is critically dependent on sensitive methods for lung-function testing. A wide body of knowledge has been accumulated in recent years showing that these methods have been significantly refined and seems promising for detection of early disease. This review focuses on research on pulmonary function analysis in COPD performed in Brazil during this century. The literature was searched using a systematic search strategy limited to English language studies that were carried out in Brazil from the year 2000 onward, with study objectives that included a focus on lung function. After we applied our inclusion and exclusion criteria, 94 articles addressed our stated objectives. Among the new methods reviewed are the forced-oscillation technique and the nitrogen-washout test, which may provide information on small-airway abnormalities. Studies investigating the respiratory muscles and thoracoabdominal motion are also discussed, as well as studies on automatic clinical decision-support systems and complexity measurements. We also examined important gaps in the present knowledge and suggested future directions for the cited research fields. There is clear evidence that improvements in lung-function methods allowed us to obtain new pathophysiological information, contributing to improvement in our understanding of COPD. In addition, they may also assist in the diagnosis and prevention of COPD. Further investigations using prospective and longitudinal design may be of interest to elucidate the use of these new methods in the diagnosis and prevention of COPD.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 20%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Other 2 4%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 11 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 18%
Computer Science 3 6%
Engineering 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 14 29%
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 13 July 2016.
All research outputs
#17,432,668
of 25,576,275 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#1,738
of 2,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,415
of 367,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#76
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,275 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 2,585 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 367,816 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.