↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Breathing exercises for dysfunctional breathing/hyperventilation syndrome in children

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
13 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
283 Mendeley
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 13 tweeters 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 283 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 279 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 63 22%
Student > Bachelor 40 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 12%
Researcher 30 11%
Student > Postgraduate 17 6%
Other 52 18%
Unknown 48 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 94 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 58 20%
Psychology 12 4%
Sports and Recreations 11 4%
Social Sciences 9 3%
Other 32 11%
Unknown 67 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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
#2,385,725
of 17,359,532 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,105
of 11,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,204
of 272,500 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#70
of 140 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,359,532 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 272,500 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 140 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 50% of its contemporaries.