| Title |
Opioids compared to placebo or other treatments for chronic low‐back pain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd004959.pub4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luis Enrique Chaparro, Andrea D Furlan, Amol Deshpande, Angela Mailis‐Gagnon, Steven Atlas, Dennis C Turk |
| Abstract |
The use of opioids in the long-term management of chronic low-back pain (CLBP) has increased dramatically. Despite this trend, the benefits and risks of these medications remain unclear. This review is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2007. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 61 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 23 | 38% |
| Canada | 5 | 8% |
| Colombia | 2 | 3% |
| Spain | 2 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Chile | 1 | 2% |
| Austria | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 23 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 49 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 11% |
| Scientists | 4 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 635 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 625 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 100 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 73 | 11% |
| Researcher | 65 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 59 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 51 | 8% |
| Other | 141 | 22% |
| Unknown | 146 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 259 | 41% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 70 | 11% |
| Psychology | 30 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 26 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 15 | 2% |
| Other | 63 | 10% |
| Unknown | 172 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 97. 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 February 2023.
All research outputs
#438,569
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#770
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,202
of 212,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#14
of 235 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. 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 212,592 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 235 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 94% of its contemporaries.