↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Vitamin C for preventing and treating the common cold

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 1998
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
51 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
123 X users
facebook
8 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 Mendeley
Title
Vitamin C for preventing and treating the common cold
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 1998
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000980
Pubmed ID
Authors

Douglas, RM, Chalker, EB, Treacy, B

Abstract

The role of oral ascorbic acid (vitamin C) in the prevention and treatment of colds remains controversial despite many controlled trials. There have also been a number of efforts to synthesize and/or overview the results of these trials, and controversy over what these overviews tell us. The objective of this review was to answer the following two questions: (1) Does regular high dosage supplementation with vitamin C reduce the incidence of colds? (2) Does taking vitamin C in high doses at the onset of a cold have a therapeutic effect? This review currently deals only with published trials from two previously published reviews by Kleijnen 1989 and Hemila 1992. Randomised and non-randomised trials of vitamin C taken to prevent or treat the common cold. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Thirty trials were included. The quality of the included trials was variable. Vitamin C in doses as high as one gram daily for several winter months, had no consistent beneficial effect on incidence of the common cold. For both preventive and therapeutic trials, there was a consistently beneficial but generally modest therapeutic effect on duration of cold symptoms. This effect was variable, ranging from -0.07% to a 39% reduction in symptom days. The weighted difference across all of the studies revealed a reduction of a little less than half a symptom day per cold episode, representing an 8% to 9% reduction in symptom days. There was no clear indication of the relative benefits of different regimes or vitamin C doses. However in trials that tested vitamin C after cold symptoms occurred, there was some evidence that a large dose produced greater benefits than lower doses. Long term daily supplementation with vitamin C in large doses daily does not appear to prevent colds. There appears to be a modest benefit in reducing duration of cold symptoms from ingestion of relatively high doses of vitamin C. The relation of dose to therapeutic benefit needs further exploration.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 123 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 95 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 18%
Other 11 11%
Student > Master 10 10%
Researcher 9 9%
Librarian 6 6%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 34 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 5%
Other 17 18%
Unknown 34 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 497. 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 21 November 2023.
All research outputs
#55,150
of 26,320,509 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#102
of 13,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9
of 33,989 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,320,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,211 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 33,989 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.