↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Speleotherapy for asthma

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
6 Wikipedia pages
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
119 Mendeley
Title
Speleotherapy for asthma
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2001
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001741
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sylvia P Beamon, Albrecht Falkenbach, Grigory Fainburg, Klaus Linde

Abstract

Speleotherapy, the use of subterranean environments, is a therapeutic measure in the treatment of chronic obstructive airways diseases. It is virtually unknown in the UK or the US, but has considerable widespread use in some Central and Eastern European countries. To review evidence for the efficacy of speleotherapy in the treatment of asthma. We searched electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Airways group database), contacted speleotherapy centres and experts in the field, hand searched proceedings, and checked bibliographies of articles obtained to identify possible relevant publications. We included controlled clinical trials (i.e., both randomized and those not reporting the method of allocation) that compared clinical effects of speleotherapy with another intervention or no intervention in patients with chronic asthma. Information concerning patients, interventions, results, and methodology were extracted in standardized manner by two independent reviewers and summarized descriptively. Three trials including a total of 124 asthmatic children met the inclusion criteria, but only one trial had reasonable methodological quality. Two trials reported that speleotherapy had a beneficial short-term effect on lung function. Other outcomes could not be assessed in a reliable manner. A further search was conducted in July 2000. One further paper was excluded (see excluded studies) The available evidence does not permit a reliable conclusion as to whether speleo-therapeutic interventions are effective for the treatment of chronic asthma. Randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up are necessary.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 116 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 14%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Researcher 8 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 4%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 52 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 13%
Sports and Recreations 4 3%
Computer Science 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 54 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 05 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,518,885
of 23,942,155 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,444
of 12,814 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,137
of 41,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,942,155 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,814 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 41,269 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.