↓ Skip to main content

Dopamine Agonists and Impulse Control Disorders: A Complex Association

Overview of attention for article published in Drug Safety, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
102 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
159 Mendeley
Title
Dopamine Agonists and Impulse Control Disorders: A Complex Association
Published in
Drug Safety, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40264-017-0590-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie Grall-Bronnec, Caroline Victorri-Vigneau, Yann Donnio, Juliette Leboucher, Morgane Rousselet, Elsa Thiabaud, Nicolas Zreika, Pascal Derkinderen, Gaëlle Challet-Bouju

Abstract

Impulse control disorders (ICDs) are a well-known adverse effect of dopamine agonists (DAAs). This critical review aims to summarize data on the prevalence and factors associated with the development of an ICD simultaneous to DAA use. A search of two electronic databases was completed from inception to July 2017. The search terms were medical subject headings (MeSH) terms including "dopamine agonists" AND "disruptive disorders", "impulse control disorders", or "conduct disorders". Articles had to fulfill the following criteria to be included: (i) the target problem was an ICD; (ii) the medication was a dopaminergic drug; and (iii) the article was an original article. Of the potential 584 articles, 90 met the criteria for inclusion. DAAs were used in Parkinson's disease (PD), restless legs syndrome (RLS) or prolactinoma. The prevalence of ICDs ranged from 2.6 to 34.8% in PD patients, reaching higher rates in specific PD populations; a lower prevalence was found in RLS patients. We found only two studies about prolactinoma. The most robust findings relative to the factors associated with the development of an ICD included the type of DAA, the dosage, male gender, a younger age, a history of psychiatric symptoms, an earlier onset of disease, a longer disease duration, and motor complications in PD. This review suggests that DAA use is associated with an increased risk in the occurrence of an ICD, under the combined influence of various factors. Guidelines to help prevent and to treat ICDs when required do exist, although further studies are required to better identify patients with a predisposition.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 159 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 159 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 24 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 11%
Researcher 17 11%
Student > Master 16 10%
Other 14 9%
Other 23 14%
Unknown 47 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 16%
Neuroscience 18 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 8%
Psychology 12 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 6%
Other 22 14%
Unknown 61 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 15 June 2023.
All research outputs
#16,327,288
of 25,784,004 outputs
Outputs from Drug Safety
#1,480
of 1,873 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,594
of 325,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Safety
#20
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,784,004 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,873 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 325,050 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.