↓ Skip to main content

Dual combination therapy versus long-acting bronchodilators alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2018
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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
97 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
Dual combination therapy versus long-acting bronchodilators alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): a systematic review and network meta-analysis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2018
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd012620.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yuji Oba, Edna Keeney, Namratta Ghatehorde, Sofia Dias

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 97 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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 5 28%
Student > Master 3 17%
Other 3 17%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Other 3 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 39%
Unspecified 5 28%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 11%
Social Sciences 2 11%
Energy 1 6%
Other 1 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 81. 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 06 February 2019.
All research outputs
#180,665
of 12,617,751 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#468
of 10,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,510
of 283,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,617,751 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,379 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 283,122 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.