↓ 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

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 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

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

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 4 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 68 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 29%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Researcher 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Other 6 9%
Other 21 30%
Unknown 1 1%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 49%
Unspecified 8 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Psychology 4 6%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 1 1%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 July 2015.
All research outputs
#6,508,866
of 12,667,698 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,612
of 10,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,877
of 231,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#204
of 266 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,667,698 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,396 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.3. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 231,569 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 266 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.