↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

New topical treatment of vulvodynia based on the pathogenetic role of cross talk between nociceptors, immunocompetent cells, and epithelial cells

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
Title
New topical treatment of vulvodynia based on the pathogenetic role of cross talk between nociceptors, immunocompetent cells, and epithelial cells
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, October 2016
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s115407
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jan M Keppel Hesselink, David J Kopsky, Nancy Sajben

Abstract

Topical treatments of localized neuropathic pain syndromes in general are mostly neglected, mainly due to the fact that most pain physicians expect that a topical formulation needs to result in a transdermal delivery of the active compounds. On the basis of the practical experience, this study brings forth a new, somewhat neglected element of the vulvodynia pathogenesis: the cross talk between the nerve endings of nociceptors, the adjacent immunocompetent cells, and vaginal epithelial cells. Insight into this cross talk during a pathogenic condition supports the treatment of vulvodynia with topical (compounded) creams. Vulvodynia was successfully treated with an analgesic cream consisting of baclofen 5% together with the autacoid palmitoylethanolamide 1%, an endogenous anti-inflammatory compound. In this review, data is presented to substantiate the rationale behind developing and prescribing topical products for localized pain states such as vulvodynia. Most chronic inflammatory disorders are based on a network pathogenesis, and monotherapeutic inroads into the treatment of such disorders are obsolete.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 34%
Other 4 13%
Student > Master 3 9%
Professor 2 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 5 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 9%
Neuroscience 3 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 6 19%
Attention Score in Context

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 02 August 2022.
All research outputs
#5,511,531
of 23,006,268 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#530
of 1,763 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,740
of 324,903 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#18
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,006,268 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 1,763 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 324,903 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 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 54% of its contemporaries.