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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Connect the Dots—August 2016
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Obstetrics & Gynecology, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1097/aog.0000000000001539 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ahizechukwu C Eke, Emily P Barnard, Andrea N Desai, Nancy C Chescheir |
| Abstract |
Lung function can be reduced not only by a non-selective beta-blocker but also by a selective beta1-receptor blocker. If both types of drug are without intrinsic sympathomimetic activity, the effect of the non-selective drug is more pronounced than that of a beta1-receptor selective drug under basal conditions. The effect of a beta2-receptor stimulating drug on the bronchi is inhibited by a non-selective drug, but much less by a selective beta1-receptor blocker. A selective beta1-receptor blocker can be used in asthmatics when it is combined with optimal anti-asthmatic therapy, while a non-selective drug is contra-indicated in patients with broncho-obstructive diseases. It is necessary to induce bronchodilatation (e.g. with a beta2-stimulator) in order to test whether or not a beta-blocker can be used in broncho-obstructive disease. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor | 1 | 33% |
| Researcher | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 03 October 2016.
All research outputs
#7,959,162
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Obstetrics & Gynecology
#4,629
of 8,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,013
of 381,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Obstetrics & Gynecology
#83
of 109 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,949 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.0. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 381,020 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 109 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.