↓ Skip to main content

Non-antiepileptic drugs for trigeminal neuralgia

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
12 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 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
Non-antiepileptic drugs for trigeminal neuralgia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004029.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jingjing Zhang, Mi Yang, Muke Zhou, Li He, Ning Chen, Joanna M Zakrzewska

Abstract

Trigeminal neuralgia was defined by the International Association for the Study of Pain as a sudden, usually unilateral, severe, brief, stabbing recurrent pain in the distribution of one or more branches of the fifth cranial nerve. Standard treatment is with anti-epileptic drugs. Non-antiepileptic drugs have been used in the management of trigeminal neuralgia since the 1970s. This is an update of a review first published in 2006 and previously updated in 2011.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 100 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 16%
Student > Bachelor 15 15%
Student > Postgraduate 10 10%
Researcher 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 9%
Other 24 24%
Unknown 17 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 45%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 25 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 17 January 2014.
All research outputs
#2,675,625
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,776
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,249
of 240,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#57
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 240,733 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.