You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Cost comparison of asthma treatments in 12-week study: caution about matching and short observational follow-up
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40248-016-0076-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David B. Price, Job F. M. van Boven, Lisa M. Law, Alessandra Cifra, R. Brett McQueen |
| Abstract |
In the absence of randomisation, observational studies must take extra care to create treatment groups that are comparable in terms of key characteristics. Various matching methods exist which can create sound comparisons, minimising confounding where possible. A recent observational study by Dal Negro et al. carried out a cost analysis comparing two asthma medications. They report strong conclusions which favour one treatment over the other, however they include little discussion on the limitations of their study. The purpose of this letter is to comment on the weaknesses of the study design, including the level of matching used, and to urge readers to consider these issues alongside the interpretation of results. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 6 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 50% |
| Researcher | 1 | 17% |
| Librarian | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 33% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 17% |
| Psychology | 1 | 17% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
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 May 2017.
All research outputs
#22,778,604
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine
#269
of 307 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#277,470
of 317,243 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine
#10
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 307 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 317,243 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.