↓ Skip to main content

Antibiotics for preventing recurrent sore throat

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
49 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
128 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
Antibiotics for preventing recurrent sore throat
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008911.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gareth JY Ng, Stephanie Tan, Anh N Vu, Chris B Del Mar, Mieke L van Driel

Abstract

Antibiotics are sometimes used to prevent recurrent sore throat, despite concern about resistance. However, there is conflicting primary evidence regarding their effectiveness. To assess the effects of antibiotics in patients with recurrent sore throat. The Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group (CENTDG) Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the CENTDG Trials Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 5); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; Clinicaltrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 25 June 2015. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of antibiotics in adults and children suffering from pre-existing recurrent sore throat, defined as three or more sore throats in a year, examining the incidence of sore throat recurrence, with follow-up of at least 12 months post-antibiotic therapy. Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Multiple attempts to contact the authors of one study yielded no response. We identified no trials that met the inclusion criteria for the review. We discarded the majority of the references retrieved from our search following screening of the title and abstract. We formally excluded four studies following review of the full-text report. There is insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of antibiotics for preventing recurrent sore throat. This finding must be balanced against the known adverse effects and cost of antibiotic therapy, when considering antibiotics for this purpose. There is a need for high quality RCTs that compare the effects of antibiotics versus placebo in adults and children with pre-existing recurrent sore throat on the following outcomes: incidence of sore throat recurrence, adverse effects, days off work and absence from school, and the incidence of complications. Future studies should be conducted and reported according to the CONSORT statement.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 49 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 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 128 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 18%
Student > Bachelor 18 14%
Researcher 11 9%
Other 10 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 6%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 36 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 10%
Psychology 5 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 2%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 42 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. 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 03 October 2022.
All research outputs
#819,963
of 22,503,967 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,772
of 12,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,510
of 246,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#41
of 255 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,503,967 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,266 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 246,661 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 255 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.