↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Orofacial pain management: current perspectives

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
178 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
474 Mendeley
Title
Orofacial pain management: current perspectives
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, February 2014
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s37593
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marcela Romero-Reyes, James M Uyanik

Abstract

Some of the most prevalent and debilitating pain conditions arise from the structures innervated by the trigeminal system (head, face, masticatory musculature, temporomandibular joint and associated structures). Orofacial pain (OFP) can arise from different regions and etiologies. Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) are the most prevalent orofacial pain conditions for which patients seek treatment. Temporomandibular disorders include a number of clinical problems that involve the masticatory musculature, the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) or both. Trigeminal neuropathic pain conditions can arise from injury secondary to dental procedures, infection, neoplasias, or disease or dysfunction of the peripheral and/or central nervous system. Neurovascular disorders, such as primary headaches, can present as chronic orofacial pain, such as in the case of facial migraine, where the pain is localized in the second and third division of the trigeminal nerve. Together, these disorders of the trigeminal system impact the quality of life of the sufferer dramatically. A multidisciplinary pain management approach should be considered for the optimal treatment of orofacial pain disorders including both non-pharmacological and pharmacological modalities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 474 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 3 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
France 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Uruguay 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 460 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 59 12%
Student > Bachelor 57 12%
Student > Postgraduate 50 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 7%
Researcher 29 6%
Other 104 22%
Unknown 140 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 244 51%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 3%
Neuroscience 12 3%
Engineering 6 1%
Other 28 6%
Unknown 149 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 December 2023.
All research outputs
#1,819,667
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#207
of 1,983 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,471
of 323,100 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,983 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 323,100 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.