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 |
Levodropropizine for treating cough in adult and children: a meta-analysis of published studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40248-015-0014-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alessandro Zanasi, Luigi Lanata, Giovanni Fontana, Federico Saibene, Peter Dicpinigaitis, Francesco De Blasio |
| Abstract |
Cough is one of the most common symptoms for which patients seek medical attention from primary care physicians and lung specialists. About 40% of the population at any one time report cough. Cough is associated with significantly impaired health-related quality of life. Levodropropizine is an effective and very well tolerated peripheral antitussive drug. We want to compare it to central cough suppressants efficacy (opioids and non-opioids) that may be associated with side effects limiting their use. After a comprehensive literature search, a meta-analysis of 7 clinical studies of levodropropizine vs. control, including a total of 1,178 patients, was performed with the aim to evaluate the overall comparative efficacy of levodropropizine in the pediatric and adult population. Three electronic databases and reference list were used to search for studies that assessed the efficacy of levodropropizine for treating cough in children and adults using as standardized efficacy parameters the cough frequency and severity, and number of night awakenings as outcome parameters. The meta-analysis of all standardized efficacy parameters showed a highly statistically significant difference in the overall antitussive efficacy in favor of levodropropizine vs. control treatments (p = 0.0015). The heterogeneity test for the efficacy outcome was not statistically significant (p = 0.0534). Seven studies met out inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of the eligible ones showed a statistically significant difference in the overall anti-tussive effect of levodropropizine versus control (p = 0.0015). This analysis indicates that levodropropizine is an effective antitussive drug in children and adults, with statistically significant better overall efficacy outcomes vs. central antitussive drugs (codeine, cloperastine, dextromethorphan) in terms of reducing cough intensity and frequency, and nocturnal awakenings. This result further reinforces the favorable benefit/risk profile of levodropropizine in the management of cough. The efficacy of levodropropizine in the treatment of cough in children and adults is higher than that of the common centrally-acting anti-tussive. |
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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 61 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 10% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 21% |
| Unknown | 20 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 34% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 11 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 21 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 29 April 2022.
All research outputs
#2,614,896
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine
#37
of 307 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,734
of 281,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
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 281,298 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them