The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Combined corticosteroid and long‐acting beta<sub>2</sub>‐agonist in one inhaler versus long‐acting beta<sub>2</sub>‐agonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd006829.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luis Javier Nannini, Toby J Lasserson, Phillippa Poole |
| Abstract |
Both inhaled steroids (ICS) and long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABA) are used in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This updated review compared compound LABA plus ICS therapy (LABA/ICS) with the LABA component drug given alone. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Grenada | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 350 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 343 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 50 | 14% |
| Researcher | 44 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 39 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 8% |
| Other | 25 | 7% |
| Other | 64 | 18% |
| Unknown | 100 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 149 | 43% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 29 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 17 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 2% |
| Other | 28 | 8% |
| Unknown | 109 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 12 September 2022.
All research outputs
#1,569,261
of 26,741,403 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,128
of 13,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,114
of 189,713 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#54
of 227 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,741,403 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,273 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 189,713 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 227 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.