↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Early emergency department treatment of acute asthma with systemic corticosteroids

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2001
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 (85th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
388 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
248 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Early emergency department treatment of acute asthma with systemic corticosteroids
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2001
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd002178
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brian H Rowe, Carol Spooner, Francine Ducharme, Jennifer Bretzlaff, Gary Bota

Abstract

The airway edema and secretions associated with acute asthma are most effectively treated with anti-inflammatories such as corticosteroids delivered by inhaled, oral, intravenous or intra-muscular routes. There is an unresolved debate about the use of systemic corticorticoids in the early treatment of acute asthma for emergency department patients. To determine the benefit of treating patients with acute asthma with systemic corticosteroids within an hour of presenting to the emergency department (ED). Randomised controlled trials were identified from the Cochrane Airways Group Asthma Register. Primary authors and content experts were contacted to identify eligible studies. Bibliographies from included studies and known reviews were searched. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion. Studies were included if patients presenting to the ED with acute asthma were treated with IV/IM or oral corticosteroids (CS) vs. placebo within 1 hour of arrival and either admission rate or pulmonary function results were reported. Trial selection, data extraction and quality assessment were carried out independently by two reviewers, and confirmed with corresponding authors. Twelve studies involving 863 patients (435 corticosteroids; 428 placebo) were included. Early use of CS for acute asthma in the ED significantly reduced admission rates (N = 11; pooled OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.78). This would correspond with a number needed to treat of 8 (95% CI: 5 to 21). This benefit was more pronounced for those not receiving systemic CS prior to ED presentation (N = 7; OR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.70) and those with more severe asthma (N = 7; OR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.59). Oral CS therapy in children was particularly effective (N = 3; OR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.53); no trials in adults used the oral route. Side effects were not significantly different between corticosteroid treatments and placebo. A further search was conducted in September 2000 which did not yield any further trials. Use of corticosteroids within 1 hour of presentation to an ED significantly reduces the need for hospital admission in patients with acute asthma. Benefits appear greatest in patients with more severe asthma, and those not currently receiving steroids. Children appear to respond well to oral steroids.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters 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 248 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 240 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 38 15%
Researcher 38 15%
Student > Bachelor 35 14%
Student > Postgraduate 24 10%
Other 20 8%
Other 57 23%
Unknown 36 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 143 58%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 14 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 2%
Other 17 7%
Unknown 43 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 14 January 2021.
All research outputs
#2,822,349
of 18,209,496 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,371
of 11,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,521
of 318,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#145
of 250 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,209,496 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,807 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 318,236 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 250 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.