ArticleBMC pulmonary medicine2021
Renaming COPD exacerbations: the UK respiratory nursing perspective.
Article in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A 7-point evidence-based care discharge protocol for patients hospitalized for exacerbation of COPD: consensus strategy and expert recommendation.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Exploring patients' and carers' experiences, understandings and expectations of COPD exacerbations:an interview study.BJGP open · 2025Article
- Effects of Ipratropium Bromide Combined with Traditional Chinese Medicine Intervention on the Pulmonary Function and Psychological Status of Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with COPD experience acute worsenings, termed 'exacerbations'. While other terms to describe these events have been proposed there is no consensus on terminology which has led to multiple terms being used across the UK. Respiratory nurses are part of a multi-disciplinary team managing COPD patients, however, the nursing perspective on the term 'exacerbation' is unknown.
methodsAn anonymised survey of 17 questions was sent to respiratory nurses through an email invitation link. The survey link was open for one month. The aim was to understand the nurse perspective on 'exacerbation'. Alternative terms used in the UK were compared versus the term 'exacerbation'.
resultsResponses were received from 113 nurses. The majority (88%) were female. There was no consensus on preference or meaning for the term 'exacerbation' between nurses. Less than 5% of nurses thought that patients with COPD would understand the term 'exacerbation'. In ranked order, the nurses preferred the following terms: 'flare-up', 'lung attack', 'crisis', 'exacerbation' and 'chest infection'. The term 'crisis', although new, was considered to be the term that most resonated with clinical practice.
conclusionRespiratory nurses in the UK report that the term 'exacerbation' is not fit for purpose for patients, and alternatives should be sought.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.