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 |
Opioid-induced hyperalgesia in chronic pain patients and the mitigating effects of gabapentin
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Pharmacology, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphar.2015.00104 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nicoleta Stoicea, Daric Russell, Greg Weidner, Michael Durda, Nicholas C. Joseph, Jeffrey Yu, Sergio D. Bergese |
| Abstract |
Chronic pain patients receiving opioid drugs are at risk for opioid-induced hyperalgesia (OIH), wherein opioid pain medication leads to a paradoxical pain state. OIH involves central sensitization of primary and secondary afferent neurons in the dorsal horn and dorsal root ganglion, similar to neuropathic pain. Gabapentin, a gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) analog anticonvulsant used to treat neuropathic pain, has been shown in animal models to reduce fentanyl hyperalgesia without compromising analgesic effect. Chronic pain patients have also exhibited lower opioid consumption and improved pain response when given gabapentin. However, few human studies investigating gabapentin use in OIH have been performed in recent years. In this review, we discuss the potential mechanisms that underlie OIH and provide a critical overview of interventional therapeutic strategies, especially the clinically-successful drug gabapentin, which may reduce OIH. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 79 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 16% |
| Researcher | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 10% |
| Other | 13 | 16% |
| Unknown | 14 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 29% |
| Neuroscience | 12 | 15% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 9% |
| Psychology | 4 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 20 | 25% |
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 06 November 2022.
All research outputs
#13,565,354
of 24,058,913 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#3,864
of 17,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,436
of 270,441 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#18
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,058,913 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,913 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 270,441 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.