↓ Skip to main content

Milnacipran for neuropathic pain in adults

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Milnacipran for neuropathic pain in adults
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011789
Pubmed ID
Authors

Derry, Sheena, Phillips, Tudor, Moore, R Andrew, Wiffen, Philip J

Abstract

Milnacipran is a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) that is sometimes used to treat chronic neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia. This is an update of an earlier review of milnacipran for neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia in adults originally published in The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2012. We split that review so that this one looked only at neuropathic pain, and a separate review looks at fibromyalgia. To assess the analgesic efficacy and associated adverse events of milnacipran for chronic neuropathic pain in adults. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and EMBASE to 23 February 2015, together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews. We included randomised, double-blind studies of eight weeks' duration or longer, comparing milnacipran with placebo or another active treatment in chronic neuropathic pain. Two review authors independently searched for studies, extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and examined issues of study quality. We did not carry out any analysis. We included a single study of 40 participants with chronic low back pain with a neuropathic component. It found no difference in pain scores between milnacipran 100 mg to 200 mg daily or placebo after six weeks (very low quality evidence). Adverse event rates were similar between treatments, with too few data to draw conclusions (very low quality evidence). There was no evidence to support the use of milnacipran to treat neuropathic pain conditions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 55%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 9%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 55%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 32%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 06 August 2015.
All research outputs
#2,957,423
of 11,185,066 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,131
of 9,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,925
of 233,370 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#193
of 262 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,185,066 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,054 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 233,370 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 262 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.