↓ Skip to main content

Inhaled corticosteroids versus long-acting beta(2)-agonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Inhaled corticosteroids versus long-acting beta(2)-agonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007033.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Spencer S, Karner C, Cates CJ, Evans DJ

Abstract

Long-acting beta(2)-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids can be used as maintenance therapy by patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. These interventions are often taken together in a combination inhaler. However, the relative added value of the two individual components is unclear.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Colombia 1 1%
Unknown 64 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 21%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Postgraduate 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Professor 7 10%
Other 22 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 72%
Unspecified 6 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 6 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 20 May 2018.
All research outputs
#3,199,047
of 12,968,481 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,953
of 10,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,390
of 213,814 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#294
of 522 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,968,481 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,419 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.5. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 213,814 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 522 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.