↓ Skip to main content

Smoking cessation for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2016
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 (87th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
154 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
Smoking cessation for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010744.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eva AM van Eerd, Regina M van der Meer, Onno CP van Schayck, Daniel Kotz

Abstract

Smoking cessation is the most important treatment for smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but little is known about the effectiveness of different smoking cessation interventions for this particular group of smokers. To evaluate the effectiveness of behavioural or pharmacological smoking cessation interventions, or both, in smokers with COPD. We searched all records in the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials. In addition to this electronic search, we searched clinical trial registries for planned, ongoing, and unpublished trials. We searched all databases from their inception. We checked the reference lists of all included studies and of other systematic reviews in relevant topic areas. We searched for errata or retractions from eligible trials on PubMed. We conducted our most recent search in March 2016. We included randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of any behavioural or pharmacological treatment, or both, in smokers with COPD reporting at least six months of follow-up abstinence rates. Two review authors independently extracted the data and performed the methodological quality assessment for each study. We resolved any disagreements by consensus. We included 16 studies (involving 13,123 participants) in this systematic review, two of which were of high quality. These two studies showed that nicotine sublingual tablet and varenicline increased the quit rate over placebo (risk ratio (RR) 2.60 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29 to 5.24) and RR 3.34 (95% CI 1.88 to 5.92)). Pooled results of two studies also showed a positive effect of bupropion compared with placebo (RR 2.03 (95% CI 1.26 to 3.28)). When pooling these four studies, we found high-quality evidence for the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy plus high-intensity behavioural treatment compared with placebo plus high-intensity behavioural treatment (RR 2.53 (95% CI 1.83 to 3.50)). Furthermore, we found some evidence that high-intensity behavioural treatment increased abstinence rates when compared with usual care (RR 25.38 (95% CI 8.03 to 80.22)) or low-intensity behavioural treatment (RR 2.18 (95% CI 1.05 to 4.49)). Finally, the results showed effectiveness of various combinations of psychosocial and pharmacological interventions. We found high-quality evidence in a meta-analysis including four (1,540 participants) of the 16 included studies that a combination of behavioural treatment and pharmacotherapy is effective in helping smokers with COPD to quit smoking. Furthermore, we conclude that there is no convincing evidence for preferring any particular form of behavioural or pharmacological treatment.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 154 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 150 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 21%
Unspecified 27 18%
Student > Bachelor 22 14%
Researcher 18 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 11%
Other 38 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 65 42%
Unspecified 28 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 10%
Social Sciences 12 8%
Psychology 8 5%
Other 25 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 28 December 2016.
All research outputs
#1,035,999
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,199
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,599
of 261,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#57
of 150 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 261,724 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 150 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 62% of its contemporaries.