↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Inhaled corticosteroids versus long‐acting beta2‐agonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2011
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 (90th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
15 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
122 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Inhaled corticosteroids versus long‐acting beta<sub>2</sub>‐agonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007033.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sally Spencer, Charlotta Karner, Christopher J Cates, David J Evans

Abstract

Long-acting beta(2)-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids can be used as maintenance therapy by patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. These interventions are often taken together in a combination inhaler. However, the relative added value of the two individual components is unclear.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 120 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 14%
Researcher 14 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Other 10 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Other 21 17%
Unknown 40 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 55 45%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Psychology 3 2%
Other 6 5%
Unknown 45 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 17 February 2022.
All research outputs
#3,048,950
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,673
of 11,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,334
of 247,018 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#74
of 206 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,484 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 247,018 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 206 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 64% of its contemporaries.