↓ Skip to main content

Nefopam: A Review of its Pharmacological Properties and Therapeutic Efficacy

Overview of attention for article published in Drugs, October 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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
patent
11 patents
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
166 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Nefopam: A Review of its Pharmacological Properties and Therapeutic Efficacy
Published in
Drugs, October 2012
DOI 10.2165/00003495-198019040-00001
Pubmed ID
Authors

R. C. Heel, R. N. Brogden, G. E. Pakes, T. M. Speight, G. S. Avery

Abstract

Nefopam is a non-narcotic analgesic not structurally related to other analgesic drugs. It is effective by the oral and parenteral routes, and when appropriate dose ratios were compared in short term studies it was shown to produce analgesia comparable to that with the oral analgesics aspirin, dextropropoxyphene and pentazocine, as well as that with 'moderate' doses of parenteral morphine, pethidine and pentazocine. However, when 'higher' dose ratios were compared, morphine and pethidine were usually more effective than nefopam, possibly due to a 'ceiling effect' for analgesia which may occur with higher doses of nefopam, as with other simple analgesics. Although a few patients with chronic pain have received nefopam for several weeks, further studies are needed to clarify its continued effectiveness and safety when used over long periods. In most patients nefopam has been relatively well tolerated, the most frequent side effects being sweating, nausea and in some studies sedation.

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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 3 13%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Master 3 13%
Other 2 9%
Professor 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 8 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 35%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 9 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 14 December 2023.
All research outputs
#1,805,794
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Drugs
#175
of 3,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,943
of 192,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs
#56
of 1,803 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 192,672 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,803 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.