{rfName}
EP

Indexed in

License and use

Citations

76

Altmetrics

Analysis of institutional authors

Mullol, JoaquimAuthorAlobid, IsamAuthorBernal-Sprekelsen, ManuelAuthorDe Sousa JcAuthor

Share

Publications
>
Article

EPOS2020: development strategy and goals for the latest European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis

Publicated to:Rhinology. 57 (3): 162-168 - 2019-01-01 57(3), DOI: 10.4193/Rhin17.253

Authors: Seys, SF; Pugin, B; Hellings, PW; Bousquet, J; Bachert, C; Gevaert, P; Van Zele, T; Fokkens, WJ; Cornet, M; Segboer, C; Agache, I; Bernal-Sprekelsen, M; Callebaut, I; Cools, L; Jorissen, M; Van Gerven, L; Cardel, LO; Carrie, S; Castelnuovo, P; Cathcart, R; Constantinidis, J; Clement, G; de Souse, JC; Cox, T; Prokopakis, E; Doulaptsi, M; Surda, P; Hopkins, C; Hox, V; Hummel, T; Hosemann, W; Jacobs, R; Landis, BN; Leunig, A; Lund, VJ; Mullol, J; Onerci, M; Palkonen, S; Proano, I; Ryan, D; Riechelmann, H; Saevels, J; Speleman, K; Vlaminck, S; Steinsvik, EA; Tomazic, PV; Vanderveken, O; Verhaeghe, B; Vierstraete, K; Wilkinson, J; Williams, S

Affiliations

Abstract

Background: The European Position Papers on Rhinosinusitis from 2005, 2007 and 2012 have had a measurable impact on the way this common condition with high impact on quality of life is managed around the world. EPOS2020 will be the latest iteration of the guideline, addressing new stakeholders and target users, presenting a summary of the latest literature and evolving treatment modalities, and formulating clear recommendations based on all available evidence. Methodology: Based on the AGREE II framework, this article demonstrates how the EPOS2020 steering group will address six key areas to ensure consistency in quality and presentation of information in the latest rhinosinusitis clinical practice guideline: scope and purpose; stakeholder involvement; rigour of development; clarity of presentation; recommendations and applicability; editorial independence. Results: By analysing the guidance from AGREE II, we formulated a detailed development strategy for EPOS2020. We identify new stakeholders and target users and ratify the importance of patient involvement in the latest EPOS guideline. New and expanded areas of research to be addressed are highlighted. We confirm our intention to use mixed methodologies, combining evidencebased medicine with real life studies; when no evidence can be found, use Delphi rounds to achieve clear, inclusive recommendations. We also introduce new concepts for dissemination of the guideline, using Internet and social media to improve accessibility. Conclusion: This article is an introduction to the EPOS2020 project, and presents the key goals, core stakeholders, planned methodology and dissemination strategies for the latest version of this influential guideline.

Keywords

allergic rhinitisasthmadiseaseseducationepidemiologyeposlifemethodologymobile applicationnasal polypspatientsprecision medicinerecommendationsrhinosinusitisself-managementsinus surgerystakeholdersupper respiratory tract infectionvalidityAdult chronic rhinosinusitisAllergic rhinitisAsthmAsthmaChronic airway diseaseDiseasesEducationEpidemiologEpidemiologyEposEvidence based medicineEvidence-based medicineGoalsHumanHumansLifeMask-rhinitisMethodologyMobile applicationMotivationNasal polyposisNasal polypsPatient participationPatientsPrecision medicineQuality of lifeRecommendationsRhinitisRhinosinusitisSelf-managementSinonasal outcome testSinus surgerySinusitisStakeholdersUpper respiratory tract infectionValidity

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal Rhinology due to its progression and the good impact it has achieved in recent years, according to the agency WoS (JCR), it has become a reference in its field. In the year of publication of the work, 2019, it was in position 4/42, thus managing to position itself as a Q1 (Primer Cuartil), in the category Otorhinolaryngology. Notably, the journal is positioned above the 90th percentile.

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from World Citations provided by WoS (ESI, Clarivate), it yields a value for the citation normalization relative to the expected citation rate of: 2.4. This indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: ESI Nov 14, 2024)

This information is reinforced by other indicators of the same type, which, although dynamic over time and dependent on the set of average global citations at the time of their calculation, consistently position the work at some point among the top 50% most cited in its field:

  • Weighted Average of Normalized Impact by the Scopus agency: 1.87 (source consulted: FECYT Feb 2024)
  • Field Citation Ratio (FCR) from Dimensions: 9.41 (source consulted: Dimensions May 2025)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-05-27, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 28
  • Scopus: 38
  • Europe PMC: 10
  • OpenCitations: 32

Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-05-27:

  • The use, from an academic perspective evidenced by the Altmetric agency indicator referring to aggregations made by the personal bibliographic manager Mendeley, gives us a total of: 81.
  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 182 (PlumX).

With a more dissemination-oriented intent and targeting more general audiences, we can observe other more global scores such as:

  • The Total Score from Altmetric: 10.2.
  • The number of mentions on the social network Facebook: 1 (Altmetric).
  • The number of mentions on the social network X (formerly Twitter): 18 (Altmetric).

Leadership analysis of institutional authors

This work has been carried out with international collaboration, specifically with researchers from: Australia; Austria; Belgium; Brazil; Canada; China; Croatia; Denmark; Finland; France; Germany; Greece; Netherlands; New Zealand; Portugal; Singapore; Sweden; Switzerland; Turkey; United Kingdom; United States of America.