↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Lidocaine‐prilocaine cream for analgesia during circumcision in newborn boys

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
Title
Lidocaine‐prilocaine cream for analgesia during circumcision in newborn boys
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000496.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna Taddio, Arne Ohlsson, Kristina Ohlsson

Abstract

Neonates routinely undergo tissue-damaging interventions as part of medical treatment. The skin is the site of noxious stimulation for many procedures, including circumcision. EMLA (eutectic mixture of local anesthetics) penetrates intact skin and has the potential to reduce pain associated with circumcision. To determine the effectiveness of EMLA compared to placebo or no treatment as an analgesic for circumcision in male newborns. The guidelines of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group were followed. No language restrictions were applied. Three reviewers (AT, KO, AO) agreed through a consensus process on the inclusion of a specific study. Randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy/effectiveness of EMLA to prevent circumcision associated pain. Behavioral and physiological outcome data were accepted for efficacy/effectiveness. Data abstracted from each report included gestational age at birth, timing and dosage regimen of EMLA, control group treatment and outcomes. Abstracted data were verified by the three investigators (AT, KO, AO). During the different stages of the surgical procedure for circumcision, the increase in heart rate was 12 - 27 beats per minute less for the EMLA group compared to placebo. In a single study, neonates treated with EMLA showed a higher oxygen saturation. Although the data from the three studies could not be combined, crying during circumcision was reported as less in the EMLA treated groups. In two studies, facial action was lower in the EMLA treated groups compared to placebo. EMLA reduces pain response during circumcision in newborn male infants. Other potentially more effective forms of analgesia for circumcision (such as dorsal penile nerve block, ring block) should be subjected to systematic reviews.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 31 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 4 13%
Student > Master 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 9 28%
Unknown 6 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Psychology 2 6%
Linguistics 1 3%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 9 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 20 August 2019.
All research outputs
#8,681,963
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9,733
of 13,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,080
of 280,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#200
of 267 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,136 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 280,132 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 267 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.