↓ Skip to main content

Comparing new treatments for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis – a network meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pulmonary Medicine, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
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.
Title
Comparing new treatments for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis – a network meta-analysis
Published in
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12890-015-0034-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emma Loveman, Vicky R Copley, David A Scott, Jill L Colquitt, Andrew J Clegg, Katherine MA O’Reilly

Abstract

The treatment landscape for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, a devastating lung disease, is changing. To investigate the effectiveness of treatments for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis we undertook a systematic review, network meta-analysis and indirect comparison. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane library for relevant studies. Randomised controlled trials of pirfenidone, nintedanib or N-acetylcysteine were eligible. Predefined processes for selecting references, extracting data and assessing study quality were applied. Our network meta-analysis of published data used a fixed effect model. For forced vital capacity measures a standardised mean difference approach was used and converted to odds ratios for interpretation. Of 1076 references, 67 were retrieved and 11 studies included. Studies were of reasonable size, populations were similar, and the overall quality was good. Only two treatments, pirfenidone (odds ratio 0.62, 95% credible interval 0.52, 0.74) and nintedanib (0.41, 95% credible interval 0.34, 0.51) produced a statistically significant slowing in the rate of forced vital capacity decline compared with placebo. In an indirect comparison, results indicate that nintedanib is statistically significantly better than pirfenidone in slowing forced vital capacity decline (odds ratio 0.67, 95% credible interval 0.51, 0.88). Results were stable in scenario analysis and random effects models. Indirect comparisons of mortality were not statistically significant between nintedanib and pirfenidone. Two treatments show beneficial effects and when compared indirectly nintedanib appears to have superior benefit on forced vital capacity. Limitations to indirect comparisons should be considered when interpreting these results, however, our findings can be useful to inform treatment decisions.

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 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Tunisia 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 85 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 21%
Other 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 9%
Professor 7 8%
Other 20 23%
Unknown 13 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 53%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 7%
Physics and Astronomy 3 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 15 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 11 July 2015.
All research outputs
#2,834,827
of 5,339,130 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#270
of 511 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,550
of 161,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#18
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,339,130 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 511 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 161,499 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.