↓ Skip to main content

Safety of regular formoterol or salmeterol in children with asthma: an overview of Cochrane reviews

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2012
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 (80th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 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.
Title
Safety of regular formoterol or salmeterol in children with asthma: an overview of Cochrane reviews
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010005.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher J Cates, Marta Oleszczuk, Elizabeth Stovold, L. Susan Wieland

Abstract

Two large surveillance studies in adults with asthma have found an increased risk of asthma-related mortality in those who took regular salmeterol as monotherapy in comparison to placebo or regular salbutamol. No similar sized surveillance studies have been carried out in children with asthma, and we remain uncertain about the comparative safety of regular combination therapy with either formoterol or salmeterol in children with asthma.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 9%
Unknown 10 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 36%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 27%
Researcher 3 27%
Librarian 1 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 27%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 9%
Psychology 1 9%
Computer Science 1 9%
Other 1 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 26 October 2016.
All research outputs
#2,992,852
of 13,454,756 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,536
of 10,598 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,539
of 143,460 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#39
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,454,756 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 77th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,598 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.0. 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 143,460 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 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 56% of its contemporaries.