↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Patient considerations in the treatment of COPD: focus on the new combination inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
Patient considerations in the treatment of COPD: focus on the new combination inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, June 2018
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s152179
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antonio Molino, Giovanna Calabrese, Mauro Maniscalco

Abstract

The pharmacological treatment for stable COPD is based on the use of inhaled bronchodilators (long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists and long-acting beta-2 adrenoceptor agonists) and inhaled corticosteroids. The use of triple inhaled therapy is recommended to selected patients with COPD. Among the various inhaler combinations in triple therapy, a new combination by fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium, and vilanterol is available for COPD patients. Recently, a large clinical trial using this combination has been published, resulting in a reduction in exacerbation rate in COPD patients. Furthermore, this combination has demonstrated efficacy and safety, with a single administration a day, through a dry powder inhalator device, which has shown a good adherence and is a preference of the patient. This review focuses on the main characteristics of this inhaler combination evaluating the main clinical effects, the patients' adherence, and the safety.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 30 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 16%
Student > Master 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 4 13%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 9 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 35%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 9 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 13 June 2018.
All research outputs
#19,924,915
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#1,288
of 1,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,528
of 342,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#42
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 342,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.