↓ Skip to main content

Combination ICS/fast-onset LABA inhaler as maintenance and reliever therapy: the future for uncontrolled adult asthma?

Overview of attention for article published in Expert Review of Respiratory Medicine, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Combination ICS/fast-onset LABA inhaler as maintenance and reliever therapy: the future for uncontrolled adult asthma?
Published in
Expert Review of Respiratory Medicine, January 2014
DOI 10.1586/17476348.2013.837777
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In the Single combination inhaler as Maintenance And Reliever Therapy (SMART) regimen, asthma patients use a corticosteroid/fast-onset long-acting beta-agonist inhaler as both regular maintenance and reliever therapy. In this multicenter, double-blind randomized controlled trial, Papi et al. have demonstrated that treatment with the combination beclometasone/formoterol hydrofluoroalkane (HFA)-MDI when used as both maintenance and reliever therapy significantly prolongs the time to the first severe asthma exacerbation and reduces severe exacerbations compared with the same fixed dose of maintenance beclometasone/formoterol HFA-MDI with salbutamol MDI for relief. These findings are consistent with those of the prior studies of the SMART regimen with the budesonide/formoterol DPI and extend the evidence for use of the SMART regimen to the extrafine beclometasone/formoterol HFA-MDI, to patients with high baseline reliever use, and to patients in whom the SMART regimen results in a step up, step down or no change in baseline inhaled corticosteroid dose.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 17%
Student > Bachelor 5 17%
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Lecturer 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 9 31%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 45%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 15 October 2014.
All research outputs
#15,307,723
of 22,766,595 outputs
Outputs from Expert Review of Respiratory Medicine
#452
of 769 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,500
of 304,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Expert Review of Respiratory Medicine
#101
of 143 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,766,595 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 769 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 304,879 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 143 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.