You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Pulmonary rehabilitation for interstitial lung disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd006322.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Leona Dowman, Catherine J Hill, Anne E Holland |
| Abstract |
Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is characterised by reduced functional capacity, dyspnoea and exercise-induced hypoxia. Pulmonary rehabilitation, an intervention that includes exercise training, is beneficial for people with other chronic lung conditions; however its effects in ILD have not been well characterised. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 20% |
| Netherlands | 3 | 15% |
| Turkey | 1 | 5% |
| Israel | 1 | 5% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 5% |
| Guinea | 1 | 5% |
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 65% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 20% |
| Scientists | 3 | 15% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 320 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 318 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 47 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 47 | 15% |
| Researcher | 32 | 10% |
| Other | 21 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 19 | 6% |
| Other | 57 | 18% |
| Unknown | 97 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 105 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 67 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 29 | 9% |
| Unknown | 101 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 07 April 2022.
All research outputs
#1,213,420
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,513
of 13,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,030
of 270,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#48
of 233 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,168 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 270,942 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 233 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.