↓ Skip to main content

Long-acting beta2-agonists for chronic asthma in adults and children where background therapy contains varied or no inhaled corticosteroid

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
92 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
121 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Long-acting beta2-agonists for chronic asthma in adults and children where background therapy contains varied or no inhaled corticosteroid
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2007
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001385.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

E. Haydn Walters, Peter G Gibson, Toby J Lasserson, Julia AE Walters

Abstract

Asthma is a common respiratory disease among both adults and children and short acting inhaled beta-2 agonists are used widely for 'reliever' bronchodilator therapy. Long acting beta-2 agonists (LABA) were introduced as prospective 'symptom controllers' in addition to inhaled corticosteroid 'preventer' therapy (ICS). In this updated review we have included studies in which patients were either not on ICS as a group, or in which some patients, but not all, were on ICS to complement previous systematic reviews of studies where LABA was given in patients uniformly receiving ICS. We have focussed particularly on serious adverse events, given previous concerns about potential risks, especially of death, from regular beta-2 agonist use.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Denmark 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 115 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 15%
Student > Bachelor 15 12%
Researcher 15 12%
Other 7 6%
Other 23 19%
Unknown 11 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 60 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 13%
Social Sciences 8 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 6%
Psychology 6 5%
Other 9 7%
Unknown 15 12%

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 01 November 2017.
All research outputs
#7,860,054
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,548
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,714
of 142,521 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#57
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 142,521 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.