↓ Skip to main content

Leukotriene inhibitors for bronchiolitis in infants and young children

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2015
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 (86th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 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
Leukotriene inhibitors for bronchiolitis in infants and young children
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010636.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fang Liu, Jing Ouyang, Atul N Sharma, Songqing Liu, Bo Yang, Wei Xiong, Rufu Xu

Abstract

Bronchiolitis is an acute inflammatory illness of the bronchioles common among infants and young children. It is often caused by the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). Management of bronchiolitis varies between clinicians, reflecting the lack of evidence for a specific treatment approach. The leukotriene pathway has been reported to be involved in the pathogenesis of bronchiolitis. Leukotriene inhibitors such as montelukast have been used in infants and young children with bronchiolitis. However, the results from limited randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are controversial and necessitate a thorough evaluation of their efficacy for bronchiolitis in infants and young children.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 24%
Student > Bachelor 12 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 16 20%
Unknown 12 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Psychology 3 4%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 16 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 05 December 2019.
All research outputs
#1,570,762
of 14,443,874 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,198
of 10,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,119
of 259,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#120
of 251 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,443,874 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,973 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 259,552 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 251 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 51% of its contemporaries.