↓ Skip to main content

“Safe and Effective When Used As Directed”: The Case of Chronic Use of Opioid Analgesics

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Toxicology, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
Title
“Safe and Effective When Used As Directed”: The Case of Chronic Use of Opioid Analgesics
Published in
Journal of Medical Toxicology, December 2012
DOI 10.1007/s13181-012-0257-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jane C. Ballantyne

Abstract

Opioid analgesics have been used increasingly over the past 20 years for the management of chronic non-cancer pain in the USA under the assumption that they were safe and effective when used as directed. The accuracy of that assumption has not been tested against accumulated evidence. The safety of opioids used on a long-term basis has not been tested in clinical trials. Epidemiologic evidence from examinations of such use in the general population indicates that the risk of overdose increases in a dose-response manner. Such evidence also suggests increased risk of fractures and acute myocardial infarctions among elderly users of opioids for chronic pain. Experimental evidence supports short-term use of opioids, but trials of long-term use for chronic pain have not been conducted. Epidemiologic evidence suggests that long-term use does not result in improvement in function or quality of life while being associated with significant dropout rates and a high prevalence of adverse drug effects. Substantial fractions of patients are not using opioid analgesics as directed, while millions of US residents are using them without a prescription for nonmedical reasons. A prudent treatment approach consistent with the available evidence would be to reserve chronic opioid therapy for serious pain-related problems for which the effectiveness of opioids has been demonstrated and for patients whose use as directed is assured through close monitoring and for whom an explicit, informed calculation has been made that the benefits of opioids outweigh the risks.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 70 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 15%
Other 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 11%
Student > Master 7 10%
Other 18 25%
Unknown 11 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Psychology 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 12 17%
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 31 October 2014.
All research outputs
#13,368,181
of 22,679,690 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Toxicology
#493
of 662 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,408
of 277,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Toxicology
#14
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,679,690 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 662 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.3. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 277,143 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.