| Title |
Combined corticosteroid and long‐acting beta<sub>2</sub>‐agonist in one inhaler versus placebo for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd003794.pub4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luis Javier Nannini, Phillippa Poole, Stephen J Milan, Rebecca Holmes, Rebecca Normansell |
| Abstract |
Both long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) have been recommended in guidelines for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Their coadministration in a combination inhaler may facilitate adherence to medication regimens and improve efficacy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 9 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 56% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 22% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 11% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 363 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Tunisia | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 351 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 55 | 15% |
| Researcher | 53 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 35 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 8% |
| Other | 25 | 7% |
| Other | 72 | 20% |
| Unknown | 95 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 160 | 44% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 14 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 4% |
| Other | 34 | 9% |
| Unknown | 105 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 22 December 2022.
All research outputs
#2,319,882
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,827
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,028
of 226,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#107
of 249 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 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 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 226,779 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 249 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 57% of its contemporaries.