↓ Skip to main content

High-dose opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: an overview of Cochrane Reviews

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2017
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 (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
130 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 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
High-dose opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: an overview of Cochrane Reviews
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2017
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd012299.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charl Els, Tanya D Jackson, Reidar Hagtvedt, Diane Kunyk, Barend Sonnenberg, Vernon G Lappi, Sebastian Straube

Abstract

Chronic pain is typically described as pain on most days for at least three months. Chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) is any chronic pain that is not due to a malignancy. Chronic non-cancer pain in adults is a common and complex clinical issue where opioids are routinely used for pain management. There are concerns that the use of high doses of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain lacks evidence of effectiveness and may increase the risk of adverse events. To describe the evidence from Cochrane Reviews and Overviews regarding the efficacy and safety of high-dose opioids (here defined as 200 mg morphine equivalent or more per day) for chronic non-cancer pain. We identified Cochrane Reviews and Overviews through a search of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (The Cochrane Library). The date of the last search was 18 April 2017. Two review authors independently assessed the search results. We planned to analyse data on any opioid agent used at high dose for two weeks or more for the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain in adults. We did not identify any reviews or overviews meeting the inclusion criteria. The excluded reviews largely reflected low doses or titrated doses where all doses were analysed as a single group; no data for high dose only could be extracted. There is a critical lack of high-quality evidence regarding how well high-dose opioids work for the management of chronic non-cancer pain in adults, and regarding the presence and severity of adverse events. No evidence-based argument can be made on the use of high-dose opioids, i.e. 200 mg morphine equivalent or more daily, in clinical practice. Trials typically used doses below our cut-off; we need to know the efficacy and harm of higher doses, which are often used in clinical practice.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 130 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 14 23%
Student > Bachelor 10 16%
Student > Master 9 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 13%
Researcher 8 13%
Other 12 19%
Unknown 1 2%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 47%
Unspecified 16 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 1 2%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 90. 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 30 September 2019.
All research outputs
#183,692
of 13,610,796 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#420
of 10,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,749
of 315,630 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#13
of 250 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,610,796 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 10,666 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 315,630 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 250 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.