↓ Skip to main content

Intravenous beta 2 -agonists versus intravenous aminophylline for acute asthma

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 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 (93rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
12 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Intravenous beta 2 -agonists versus intravenous aminophylline for acute asthma
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010256
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew H Travers, Arthur P Jones, Carlos A Camargo Jr, Stephen J Milan, Brian H Rowe

Abstract

Inhaled beta(2)-agonist therapy is central to the management of acute asthma. For rapid bronchodilation in severe cases, penetration of inhaled drug to the affected small conducting airway may be impeded, and the intravenous (IV) rather than inhaled administration of bronchodilators may provide an earlier response. IV beta(2)-agonist agents and IV aminophylline may also be considered as additional interventions in this setting and this review compares IV beta-agonist agents and IV aminophylline in the treatment of people with acute asthma.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Peru 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Colombia 1 1%
Unknown 97 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 17%
Student > Bachelor 12 12%
Unspecified 10 10%
Other 9 9%
Researcher 9 9%
Other 22 22%
Unknown 21 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 54 54%
Unspecified 13 13%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 21 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 September 2019.
All research outputs
#983,989
of 13,583,919 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,005
of 10,644 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,258
of 248,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#177
of 503 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,583,919 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,644 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 248,403 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 503 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 64% of its contemporaries.