↓ Skip to main content

A Review of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Panic Disorder in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: The Rationale for Interoceptive Exposure

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
Title
A Review of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Panic Disorder in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: The Rationale for Interoceptive Exposure
Published in
Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, April 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10880-014-9393-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Terri L. Barrera, Kathleen M. Grubbs, Mark E. Kunik, Ellen J. Teng

Abstract

Panic disorder commonly co-occurs in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and translational interventions are needed to address the fear of physiological arousal in this population. This paper examines the utility of interoceptive exposures (IE), a key component of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for panic disorder, in patients with comorbid panic and COPD. Our translational review of the literature suggests that IE is supported by both cognitive- and learning-theory perspectives of panic, and that the breathing exercises associated with IE are safe and highly compatible with existing pulmonary rehabilitation exercises for COPD. Unfortunately, few research studies have examined the use of CBT to treat anxiety in COPD patients, and none have included IE. Given the strong theoretical and empirical support for the use of IE, we suggest that mental health providers should consider incorporating IE into CBT interventions for patients with comorbid panic and COPD.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 79 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 16%
Student > Master 12 15%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Professor 3 4%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 21 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 29 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 9%
Unspecified 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 25 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 20 July 2023.
All research outputs
#6,939,786
of 22,753,345 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings
#174
of 441 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,095
of 226,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,753,345 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 441 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 226,135 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 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