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 |
Efficacy and safety of oral baclofen in the management of spasticity: A rationale for intrathecal baclofen.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2340/16501977-2211 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Per Ertzgaard, Claudia Campo, Alessandra Calabrese |
| Abstract |
Oral baclofen has long been a mainstay in the management of spasticity. This review looks at the clinical evidence for the efficacy and safety of oral baclofen in patients with spasticity of any origin or severity, to determine whether there is a rationale for the use of intrathecal baclofen. Results suggest that oral baclofen may be effective in many patients with spasticity, regardless of the underlying disease or severity, and that it is at least comparable with other antispasmodic agents. However, adverse effects, such as muscle weakness, nausea, somnolence and paraesthesia, are common with oral baclofen, affecting between 25% and 75% of patients, and limiting its usefulness. Intrathecal baclofen may be an effective alternative as the drug is delivered directly into the cerebrospinal fluid, thus bypassing the blood-brain barrier and thereby optimizing the efficacy of baclofen while minimizing drug-related side-effects. Intrathecal baclofen is a viable option in patients who experience intolerable side-effects or who fail to respond to the maximum recommended dose of oral baclofen. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Egypt | 1 | 50% |
| Sweden | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 111 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 18 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 7% |
| Researcher | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 19 | 17% |
| Unknown | 36 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 7% |
| Engineering | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 15 | 14% |
| Unknown | 40 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 05 August 2023.
All research outputs
#4,761,537
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine
#191
of 1,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,372
of 421,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine
#12
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,280 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 421,709 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.