↓ Skip to main content

Opioids compared to placebo or other treatments for chronic low-back pain

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
79 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
171 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
476 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 79 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 476 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%
Brazil 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 465 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 84 18%
Student > Bachelor 60 13%
Researcher 54 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 51 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 49 10%
Other 113 24%
Unknown 65 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 224 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 52 11%
Psychology 25 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 22 5%
Social Sciences 15 3%
Other 50 11%
Unknown 88 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 72. 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 02 September 2020.
All research outputs
#307,128
of 15,815,654 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#711
of 11,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,364
of 163,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#11
of 126 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,815,654 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 11,297 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 163,593 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 126 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 91% of its contemporaries.