↓ Skip to main content

Antipsychotics for acute and chronic pain in adults

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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
35 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 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
Antipsychotics for acute and chronic pain in adults
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004844.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stefan Seidel, Martin Aigner, Michael Ossege, Elisabeth Pernicka, Brigitte Wildner, Thomas Sycha

Abstract

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 2008. The role of antipsychotics as adjuvant analgesics is a subject of longstanding controversy. Neuroleptanalgesia (that is a state of quiescence, altered awareness, and analgesia produced by a combination of taking an opioid analgesic and an antipsychotic), an established term for the management of acute pain, was shown to negatively influence disease course and total mortality in unstable angina patients. Nevertheless, antipsychotics are used to treat chronic pain (for example chronic headache, fibromyalgia and diabetic neuropathia). With atypical antipsychotics, a new class of antipsychotics, both fewer extrapyramidal side effects and additional benefits may be available.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 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 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Unknown 122 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 16%
Student > Master 19 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 10%
Other 13 10%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Other 28 22%
Unknown 20 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 66 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 7%
Psychology 6 5%
Neuroscience 5 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 27 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 23 May 2018.
All research outputs
#617,729
of 13,588,841 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,960
of 10,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,644
of 159,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#24
of 126 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,588,841 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,646 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 159,232 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 94% 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 well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.