↓ Skip to main content

Does War Hurt? Effects of Media Exposure After Missile Attacks on Chronic Pain

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, June 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 (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
Title
Does War Hurt? Effects of Media Exposure After Missile Attacks on Chronic Pain
Published in
Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, June 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10880-012-9313-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sheera F. Lerman, Zvia Rudich, Golan Shahar

Abstract

This study focused on the effects of exposure to terrorist missile attacks on the physical and mental well being of chronic pain patients. In this prospective and longitudinal design, 55 chronic pain patients treated at a specialty pain clinic completed self-report questionnaires regarding their pain, depression and anxiety pre- and post a three week missile attack on the southern region of Israel. In addition, levels of direct and indirect exposure to the attacks were measured. Results of regression analyses showed that exposure to the attacks through the media predicted an increase in pain intensity and in the sensory component of pain during the pre-post war period, but did not predict depression, anxiety or the affective component of pain. These findings contribute to the understanding of the effects of terrorism on physical and emotional distress and identify chronic pain patients as a vulnerable population requiring special attention during terrorism-related stress.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 2%
Unknown 55 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 10 18%
Researcher 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Professor 3 5%
Other 13 23%
Unknown 10 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 14%
Social Sciences 8 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 13 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 29 October 2019.
All research outputs
#3,238,891
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings
#51
of 460 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,672
of 167,448 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings
#1
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 460 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 167,448 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them