| Title |
Beclometasone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009769.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daan A De Coster, Melvyn Jones, Nikita Thakrar |
| Abstract |
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic obstructive lung condition, diagnosed in patients with dyspnoea, chronic cough or sputum production and/or a history of risk factor exposure, if their postbronchodilator forced expiratory lung volume in 1 second (FEV1)/forced vital lung capacity (FVC) ratio is less than 0.70, according to the international GOLD (Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease) criteria.Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) medications are now recommended for COPD only in combination treatment with long-acting beta2-agonists (LABAs), and only for patients of GOLD stage 3 and stage 4 severity, for both GOLD groups C and D.ICS are expensive and how effective they are is a topic of controversy, particularly in relation to their adverse effects (pneumonia), which may be linked to more potent ICS. It is unclear whether beclometasone dipropionate (BDP), an unlicensed but widely used inhaled steroid, is a safe and effective alternative to other ICS. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 6 | 43% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 14% |
| Unknown | 6 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 79% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 7% |
| Scientists | 1 | 7% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 223 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 218 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 28 | 13% |
| Researcher | 25 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 9% |
| Other | 17 | 8% |
| Other | 41 | 18% |
| Unknown | 68 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 95 | 43% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 9% |
| Psychology | 7 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 19 | 9% |
| Unknown | 76 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 31 January 2023.
All research outputs
#2,388,589
of 24,116,965 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,026
of 12,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,935
of 214,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#101
of 217 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,116,965 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 214,409 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 217 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 53% of its contemporaries.