↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Mucolytics for bronchiectasis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
84 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
231 Mendeley
Title
Mucolytics for bronchiectasis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001289.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark Wilkinson, Karnam Sugumar, Stephen J Milan, Anna Hart, Alan Crockett, Iain Crossingham

Abstract

Bronchiectasis is predominantly an acquired disease process that represents the end stage of a variety of unrelated pulmonary insults. It is defined as persistent irreversible dilatation and distortion of medium-sized bronchi. It has been suggested that with widespread use of high-resolution computed tomography, more bronchiectasis diagnoses are being made. Patients diagnosed with bronchiectasis frequently have difficulty expectorating sputum. Sputum therefore is retained in the lungs and may become infected, leading to further lung damage. Mucolytic agents target hypersecretion or changed physiochemical properties of sputum to make it easier to clear. One drug, recombinant human DNase, breaks down the DNA that is released at the site of infection by neutrophils.Mucus clearance along with antimicrobial therapy remains an integral part of bronchiectasis management. Chest physiotherapy along with mucolytic agents is commonly used in practice without clear supportive evidence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 231 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 224 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 37 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 10%
Student > Bachelor 20 9%
Other 18 8%
Researcher 18 8%
Other 50 22%
Unknown 66 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 91 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 13%
Psychology 7 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 3%
Other 20 9%
Unknown 72 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 08 February 2023.
All research outputs
#3,407,933
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,043
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,861
of 242,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#108
of 206 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.9. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 242,361 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 206 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.