↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

New developments in the management of overactive bladder: focus on mirabegron and onabotulinumtoxinA

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
New developments in the management of overactive bladder: focus on mirabegron and onabotulinumtoxinA
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, April 2013
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s33052
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karl-Erik Andersson

Abstract

In the last few years, much new information has been generated on the pathophysiology, possible therapeutic targets, and pharmacologic treatment of overactive bladder (OAB). Antimuscarinic drugs are still first-line pharmacologic treatment for OAB and often have good initial response rates, but adverse effects and decreasing efficacy cause long-term compliance problems, prompting a search for new therapeutic alternatives. Mirabegron and onabotulinumtoxinA, two drugs with different mechanisms of action, and with adverse effect profiles different from those of antimuscarinics, were recently approved for treatment of OAB. However, their place in the treatment of this disorder has not yet been established. In this short review, the mechanisms of action, clinical efficacy, and safety profiles of these drugs are discussed and compared with those of the current gold standard, antimuscarinic agents.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 10%
Belgium 1 5%
Unknown 17 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 30%
Researcher 4 20%
Student > Master 3 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 5%
Other 4 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 65%
Unspecified 3 15%
Mathematics 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Other 1 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 24 April 2013.
All research outputs
#2,308,330
of 4,507,280 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#232
of 397 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,039
of 88,321 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#8
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 397 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 88,321 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.