| Title |
Breathing exercises for dysfunctional breathing/hyperventilation syndrome in children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd010376.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Barker NJ, Jones M, O'Connell NE, Everard ML, Jones, Mandy, Harvey, Alex, Marston, Louise, O'Connell, Neil E, Nicola J Barker, Mandy Jones, Neil E O'Connell, Mark L Everard, Barker, Nicola J, Everard, Mark L |
| Abstract |
Dysfunctional breathing is described as chronic or recurrent changes in breathing pattern causing respiratory and non-respiratory symptoms. It is an umbrella term that encompasses hyperventilation syndrome and vocal cord dysfunction. Dysfunctional breathing affects 10% of the general population. Symptoms include dyspnoea, chest tightness, sighing and chest pain which arise secondary to alterations in respiratory pattern and rate. Little is known about dysfunctional breathing in children. Preliminary data suggest 5.3% or more of children with asthma have dysfunctional breathing and that, unlike in adults, it is associated with poorer asthma control. It is not known what proportion of the general paediatric population is affected. Breathing training is recommended as a first-line treatment for adults with dysfunctional breathing (with or without asthma) but no similar recommendations are available for the management of children. As such, breathing retraining is adapted from adult regimens based on the age and ability of the child. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 25% |
| Spain | 2 | 17% |
| Canada | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 17% |
| Scientists | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 415 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 411 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 73 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 50 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 38 | 9% |
| Researcher | 32 | 8% |
| Other | 20 | 5% |
| Other | 76 | 18% |
| Unknown | 126 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 103 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 71 | 17% |
| Psychology | 18 | 4% |
| Sports and Recreations | 14 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 12 | 3% |
| Other | 47 | 11% |
| Unknown | 150 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 09 December 2017.
All research outputs
#3,695,565
of 23,566,295 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,282
of 12,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,232
of 309,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#128
of 229 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,566,295 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,743 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 309,938 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 229 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.