↓ Skip to main content

Clinical Management of Pulmonary Disorders and Diseases

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 44: Importance of GOLD Guidelines for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
20 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.
Chapter title
Importance of GOLD Guidelines for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Chapter number 44
Book title
Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/5584_2017_44
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-969544-0, 978-3-31-969545-7
Authors

Sadlonova, J., Osinova, D., Rozborilova, E., Osina, O., Novakova, E., Sadlonova, V., J. Sadlonova, D. Osinova, E. Rozborilova, O. Osina, E. Novakova, V. Sadlonova

Abstract

In December 2011, a major revision of GOLD 2011 guidelines was published based on the evidence-based medicine. The goal of GOLD 2011 is to determine the severity of the disease, its impact on the patient's health, and the risk of future events; all of which eventually guide therapy. A combined COPD assessment according to GOLD 2011 considers the patient's level of symptoms, spirometry abnormalities, risk of exacerbation, and the presence of comorbidities. GOLD 2011 stratifies patients into four basic groups labeled A, B, C, and D. The aim of the present study was to assess the importance of updated GOLD guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of COPD. We found that the multicomponent 2011 guidelines offer a significant advantage over the previous mono-component COPD assessment according to GOLD 2006 in terms of disease control and therapy management, with patients enjoying better spirometry values and a higher arterial oxygen content considered the primary outcomes of interest.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Other 1 5%
Professor 1 5%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 7 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 10 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 01 July 2017.
All research outputs
#13,493,170
of 23,864,146 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#1,795
of 5,069 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,738
of 317,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#44
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,864,146 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,069 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 317,416 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.