↓ Skip to main content

Long-acting beta(2)-agonist in addition to tiotropium versus either tiotropium or long-acting beta(2)-agonist alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2012
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 (77th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 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
Long-acting beta(2)-agonist in addition to tiotropium versus either tiotropium or long-acting beta(2)-agonist alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008989.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karner C, Cates CJ, Karner, Charlotta, Cates, Christopher J

Abstract

Long-acting bronchodilators comprising long-acting beta(2)-agonists and the anticholinergic agent tiotropium are commonly used for managing persistent symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Combining these treatments, which have different mechanisms of action, may be more effective than the individual components. However, the benefits and risks of combining tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonists for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary (COPD) disease are 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 2%
Colombia 1 2%
Unknown 63 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 20%
Student > Master 11 17%
Other 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Other 16 25%
Unknown 3 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 63%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 5 8%

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 01 January 2018.
All research outputs
#2,980,580
of 12,363,980 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,716
of 8,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,628
of 116,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#38
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,363,980 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 8,464 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.9. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 116,928 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 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 52% of its contemporaries.