↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Beclometasone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 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 (89th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
219 Mendeley
Title
Beclometasone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009769.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daan A De Coster, Melvyn Jones, Nikita Thakrar

Abstract

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic obstructive lung condition, diagnosed in patients with dyspnoea, chronic cough or sputum production and/or a history of risk factor exposure, if their postbronchodilator forced expiratory lung volume in 1 second (FEV1)/forced vital lung capacity (FVC) ratio is less than 0.70, according to the international GOLD (Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease) criteria.Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) medications are now recommended for COPD only in combination treatment with long-acting beta2-agonists (LABAs), and only for patients of GOLD stage 3 and stage 4 severity, for both GOLD groups C and D.ICS are expensive and how effective they are is a topic of controversy, particularly in relation to their adverse effects (pneumonia), which may be linked to more potent ICS. It is unclear whether beclometasone dipropionate (BDP), an unlicensed but widely used inhaled steroid, is a safe and effective alternative to other ICS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 219 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 1%
United States 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 214 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 13%
Researcher 25 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 10%
Student > Bachelor 19 9%
Other 16 7%
Other 39 18%
Unknown 71 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 90 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 8%
Psychology 7 3%
Social Sciences 5 2%
Computer Science 2 <1%
Other 18 8%
Unknown 79 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 31 January 2023.
All research outputs
#2,540,958
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,078
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,775
of 223,006 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#101
of 221 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 223,006 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 221 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 54% of its contemporaries.