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 |
Continuous versus intermittent beta‐agonists for acute asthma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2003
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd001115 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carlos A Camargo, Carol Spooner, Brian H Rowe |
| Abstract |
Patients with acute asthma treated in the emergency department are frequently treated with intermittent inhaled beta-agonists delivered by nebulisation. The use of continuous beta-agonist (CBA) via nebulisation in the emergency setting may offer additional benefits in acute asthma. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| South Africa | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 174 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 169 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 30 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 32 | 18% |
| Unknown | 57 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 72 | 41% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 6% |
| Unknown | 59 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 02 June 2016.
All research outputs
#5,333,080
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,262
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,920
of 56,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#18
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 56,332 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 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 51% of its contemporaries.