↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Short acting beta2-agonists for recurrent wheeze in children under two years of age

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2002
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 (81st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
162 Mendeley
Title
Short acting beta2-agonists for recurrent wheeze in children under two years of age
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2002
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd002873
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard JPG Chavasse, Paul Seddon, Anna Bara, Michael C McKean

Abstract

Wheeze is a common symptom in infancy and is a common cause for both primary care consultations and hospital admission. Beta2-adrenoceptor agonists (b2-agonists) are the most frequently used as bronchodilator but their efficacy is questionable. To determine the effectiveness of b2-agonist for the treatment of infants with recurrent and persistent wheeze. Relevant trials were identified using the Cochrane Airways Group database (CENTRAL), Medline and Pubmed. The database search used the following terms: Wheeze or asthma and Infant or Child and Short acting beta-agonist or Salbutamol (variants), Albuterol, Terbutaline (variants), Orciprenaline, Fenoterol Randomised controlled trials comparing the effect of b2-agonist against placebo in children under 2 years of age who had had two or more previous episodes of wheeze, not related to another form of chronic lung disease. Eight studies met the criteria for inclusion in this meta-analysis. The studies investigated patients in three settings: at home (3 studies), in hospital (2 studies) and in the pulmonary function laboratory (3 studies). The main outcome measure was change in respiratory rate except for community based studies where symptom scores were used. The studies were markedly heterogeneous and between study comparisons were limited. Improvement in respiratory rate, symptom score and oxygen saturation were noted in one study in the emergency department following two salbutamol nebulisers but this had no impact on hospital admission. There was a reduction in bronchial reactivity following salbutamol. There was no significant benefit from taking regular inhaled salbutamol on symptom scores recorded at home. There is no clear benefit of using b2-agonists in the management of recurrent wheeze in the first two years of life although there is conflicting evidence. At present, further studies should only be performed if the patient group can be clearly defined and there is a suitable outcome parameter capable of measuring a response.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 162 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 159 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 11%
Student > Master 17 10%
Other 15 9%
Student > Postgraduate 10 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 33 20%
Unknown 59 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 59 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 8%
Unspecified 6 4%
Psychology 5 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 13 8%
Unknown 63 39%

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 31 October 2019.
All research outputs
#3,912,953
of 20,581,464 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,395
of 12,081 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,210
of 338,787 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#153
of 245 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,581,464 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,081 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.3. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 338,787 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 245 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.