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 |
Relationship between Dysphagia and Exacerbations in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Literature Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1055/s-0034-1376430 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eduardo Steidl, Carla Simone Ribeiro, Bruna Franciele Gonçalves, Natália Fernandes, Vívian Antunes, Renata Mancopes |
| Abstract |
Introduction The literature presents studies correlating chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to dysphagia and suggesting that the aspiration laryngeal phenomenon related to changes in the pharyngeal phase contributes significantly to the exacerbation of symptoms of lung disease. Objectives This study aimed to conduct a literature review to identify the relation between dysphagia and exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Data Synthesis We found 21 studies and included 19 in this review. The few studies that related to the subject agreed that the presence of dysphagia, due to lack of coordination between swallowing and breathing, may be one of the triggering factors of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation. Conclusions The review noted that there is a relationship between dysphagia and exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, identified by studies demonstrating that the difficulties associated with swallowing may lead to exacerbation of the disease. There was difficulty in comparing studies by their methodological differences. More research is needed to clarify the relationship between dysphagia and exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, making it possible to develop multiprofessional treatment strategies for these patients, catered to specific needs due to the systemic manifestations of the disease. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 | 50% |
| Unknown | 4 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 38% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 73 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 19% |
| Researcher | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 12% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 18% |
| Unknown | 20 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 22% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 7% |
| Linguistics | 4 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 23 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 23 January 2020.
All research outputs
#1,947,771
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#14
of 731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,487
of 276,302 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#2
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 731 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 276,302 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.