↓ Skip to main content

Buprenorphine/Naloxone

Overview of attention for article published in Drugs, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent
wikipedia
10 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
128 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Buprenorphine/Naloxone
Published in
Drugs, September 2012
DOI 10.2165/00003495-200969050-00006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer S. Orman, Gillian M. Keating

Abstract

Buprenorphine/naloxone (Suboxone) comprises the partial mu-opioid receptor agonist buprenorphine in combination with the opioid antagonist naloxone in a 4 : 1 ratio. When buprenorphine/naloxone is taken sublingually as prescribed, the naloxone exerts no clinically significant effect, leaving the opioid agonist effects of buprenorphine to predominate. However, when buprenorphine/naloxone is parenterally administered in patients physically dependent on full agonist opioids, the opioid antagonism of naloxone causes withdrawal effects, thus reducing the abuse potential of the drug combination. Buprenorphine/naloxone is an effective maintenance therapy for opioid dependence and has generally similar efficacy to methadone, although more data are needed. Less frequent dispensing of buprenorphine/naloxone (e.g. thrice weekly) does not appear to compromise efficacy and can improve patient satisfaction. Buprenorphine/naloxone is more effective than clonidine as a medically-supervised withdrawal therapy. Moreover, buprenorphine/naloxone is a generally well tolerated medically-supervised withdrawal and maintenance treatment. Thus, sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone is a valuable pharmacotherapy for the treatment of opioid dependence.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Singapore 1 2%
Unknown 53 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 24%
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Student > Master 4 7%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 13 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 9%
Neuroscience 3 6%
Psychology 3 6%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 15 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 03 January 2023.
All research outputs
#4,835,823
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Drugs
#740
of 3,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,328
of 189,082 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs
#246
of 1,461 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,464 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 189,082 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,461 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.