↓ Skip to main content

Which chronic obstructive pulmonary disease care recommendations have low implementation and why? A pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
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.
Title
Which chronic obstructive pulmonary disease care recommendations have low implementation and why? A pilot study
Published in
BMC Research Notes, November 2012
DOI 10.1186/1756-0500-5-652
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kylie Johnston, Karen Grimmer-Somers, Mary Young, Ral Antic, Peter Frith

Abstract

Clinical care components for people with COPD are recommended in guidelines if high-level evidence exists. However, there are gaps in their implementation, and factors which act as barriers or facilitators to their uptake are not well described. The aim of this pilot study was to explore implementation of key high-evidence COPD guideline recommendations in patients admitted to hospital with a disease exacerbation, to inform the development of a larger observational study.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Korea, Republic of 1 3%
Netherlands 1 3%
Unknown 35 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 26%
Student > Master 9 24%
Student > Postgraduate 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 7 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Unspecified 3 8%
Psychology 3 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 7 18%

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 24 November 2012.
All research outputs
#9,954,343
of 12,434,754 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,932
of 2,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,036
of 258,333 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#121
of 167 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,434,754 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,781 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 258,333 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 167 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.