↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Profile of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol dry powder inhaler combination therapy as a potential treatment for COPD

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
Title
Profile of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol dry powder inhaler combination therapy as a potential treatment for COPD
Published in
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, February 2014
DOI 10.2147/copd.s32604
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gaetano Caramori, Ian Adcock, Kian Fan Chung

Abstract

Currently, there is no cure for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The limited efficacy of current therapies for COPD indicates a pressing need to develop new treatments to prevent the progression of the disease, which consumes a significant amount of health care resources and is an important cause of mortality worldwide. Current national and international guidelines for the management of stable COPD patients recommend the use of inhaled long-acting bronchodilators, inhaled corticosteroids, and their combination for maintenance treatment of moderate to severe stable COPD. Once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol dry powder inhaler combination therapy has recently been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency as a new regular treatment for patients with stable COPD. Fluticasone furoate/vilanterol dry powder inhaler combination therapy has been shown to be effective in many controlled clinical trials involving thousands of patients in the regular treatment of stable COPD. This is the first once-daily combination of ultra-long-acting inhaled β2-agonists and inhaled glucocorticoids that is available for the treatment of stable COPD and has great potential to improve compliance to long-term regular inhaled therapy and hence to improve the natural history and prognosis of COPD patients.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 11 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 16%
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 5 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 47%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 8 19%

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 07 April 2014.
All research outputs
#14,361,735
of 21,362,911 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#1,467
of 2,222 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,479
of 207,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#21
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,362,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,222 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 207,313 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.