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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Phantom Limb Pain in Pediatric Oncology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neurology, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fneur.2018.00219 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patrick DeMoss, Logan H. Ramsey, Cynthia Windham Karlson |
| Abstract |
Phantom limb pain (PLP) is a prevalent problem for children and adolescents undergoing amputation due to cancer treatment. The symptoms are wide ranging from sharp to tingling. PLP in children typically lasts for a few minutes but can be almost constant and can be highly distressing. This focused review describes the characteristics, epidemiology, mechanisms, and evidence-based treatment of PLP in pediatric populations, focusing on pediatric cancer. In pediatric oncology, the administration of chemotherapy is a risk factor that potentially sensitizes the nervous system and predisposes pediatric cancer patients to develop PLP after amputation. Gabapentin, tricyclic antidepressants, opiates, nerve blocks, and epidural catheters have shown mixed success in adults and case reports document potential utility in pediatric patients. Non-pharmacologic treatments, such as mirror therapy, psychotherapy, and acupuncture have also been used in pediatric PLP with success. Prospective controlled trials are necessary to advance care for pediatric patients with PLP. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Philippines | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 84 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 12% |
| Researcher | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Unknown | 29 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 33 | 39% |
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 06 May 2020.
All research outputs
#5,545,137
of 22,952,268 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#3,851
of 11,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,667
of 328,976 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#67
of 275 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,952,268 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,843 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 328,976 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 275 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.