↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Nebulized and oral thiol derivatives for pulmonary disease in cystic fibrosis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2013
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 (79th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 Mendeley
Title
Nebulized and oral thiol derivatives for pulmonary disease in cystic fibrosis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007168.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julian Tam, Edward F Nash, Felix Ratjen, Elizabeth Tullis, Anne Stephenson

Abstract

Cystic fibrosis is an inherited condition resulting in thickened, sticky respiratory secretions. Respiratory failure, due to recurrent pulmonary infection and inflammation, is the most common cause of mortality. Muco-active therapies (e.g. dornase alfa and nebulized hypertonic saline) may decrease sputum viscosity, increase airway clearance of sputum, reduce infection and inflammation and improve lung function. Thiol derivatives, either oral or nebulized, have shown benefit in other respiratory diseases. Their mode of action is likely to differ according to the route of administration. There are several thiol derivatives, and it is unclear which of these may be beneficial in cystic fibrosis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 119 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 16%
Researcher 14 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 11%
Student > Bachelor 13 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 27 23%
Unknown 26 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 29 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 29 July 2022.
All research outputs
#4,561,998
of 22,986,950 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,921
of 12,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,799
of 195,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#180
of 326 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,986,950 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,343 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.7. 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 195,289 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 326 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.