↓ Skip to main content

Pain assessment for people with dementia: a systematic review of systematic reviews of pain assessment tools

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, December 2014
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
54 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
124 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
214 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
Pain assessment for people with dementia: a systematic review of systematic reviews of pain assessment tools
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2318-14-138
Pubmed ID
Authors

Valentina Lichtner, Dawn Dowding, Philip Esterhuizen, S José Closs, Andrew F Long, Anne Corbett, Michelle Briggs

Abstract

There is evidence of under-detection and poor management of pain in patient with dementia, in both long-term and acute care. Accurate assessment of pain in people with dementia is challenging and pain assessment tools have received considerable attention over the years, with an increasing number of tools made available. Systematic reviews on the evidence of their validity and utility mostly compare different sets of tools. This review of systematic reviews analyses and summarises evidence concerning the psychometric properties and clinical utility of pain assessment tools in adults with dementia or cognitive impairment.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 54 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 214 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Unknown 212 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 45 21%
Student > Bachelor 39 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 7%
Student > Postgraduate 15 7%
Other 42 20%
Unknown 31 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 69 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 60 28%
Psychology 17 8%
Social Sciences 7 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Other 18 8%
Unknown 38 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 September 2019.
All research outputs
#579,333
of 14,537,485 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#73
of 1,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,844
of 301,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#4
of 123 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,537,485 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,602 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 301,020 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 123 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 96% of its contemporaries.