| Title |
Assessing and treating primary headaches and cranio-facial pain in patients undergoing rehabilitation for neurological diseases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Journal of Headache and Pain, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s10194-017-0809-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cristina Tassorelli, Marco Tramontano, Mariangela Berlangieri, Vittorio Schweiger, Mariagrazia D’Ippolito, Valerio Palmerini, Sara Bonazza, Riccardo Rosa, Rosanna Cerbo, Maria Gabriella Buzzi |
| Abstract |
Pain is a very common condition in patient undergoing rehabilitation for neurological disease; however the presence of primary headaches and other cranio-facial pains, particularly when they are actually or apparently independent from the disability for which patient is undergoing rehabilitation, is often neglected. Diagnostic and therapeutic international and national guidelines, as well as tools for the subjective measure of head pain are available and should also be applied in the neurorehabilitation setting. This calls for searching the presence of head pain, independently from the rehabilitation needs, since pain, either episodic or chronic, interferes with patient performance by affecting physical and emotional status. Pain may also interfere with sleep and therefore hamper recovery. In our role of task force of the Italian Consensus Conference on Pain in Neurorehabilitation (ICCPN), we have elaborated specific recommendations for diagnosing and treating head pains in patients undergoing rehabilitation for neurological diseases. In this narrative review, we describe the available literature that has been evaluated in order to define the recommendations and outline the needs of epidemiological studies concerning headache and other cranio-facial pain in neurorehabilitation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 3 | 60% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 116 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 11% |
| Researcher | 12 | 10% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 23 | 20% |
| Unknown | 38 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 16% |
| Psychology | 13 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 11% |
| Unknown | 41 | 35% |
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 11 November 2022.
All research outputs
#2,367,783
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Headache and Pain
#277
of 1,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,410
of 322,906 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Headache and Pain
#8
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,417 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 322,906 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.