↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

The usefulness of ozone treatment in spinal pain

Overview of attention for article published in Drug Design, Development and Therapy, May 2015
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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
75 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 Mendeley
Title
The usefulness of ozone treatment in spinal pain
Published in
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, May 2015
DOI 10.2147/dddt.s74518
Pubmed ID
Authors

Velio Bocci, Emma Borrelli, Iacopo Zanardi, Valter Travagli

Abstract

The aim of this review is to elucidate the biochemical, molecular, immunological, and pharmaceutical mechanisms of action of ozone dissolved in biological fluids. Studies performed during the last two decades allow the drawing of a comprehensive framework for understanding and recommending the integration of ozone therapy for spinal pain. An in-depth screening of primary sources of information online - via SciFinder Scholar, Google Scholar, and Scopus databases as well as Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Database of Systemic Reviews - was performed. In this review, the most significant papers of the last 25 years are presented and their proposals critically evaluated, regardless of the bibliometric impact of the journals. The efficacy of standard treatments combined with the unique capacity of ozone therapy to reactivate the innate antioxidant system is the key to correcting the oxidative stress typical of chronic inflammatory diseases. Pain pathways and control systems of algesic signals after ozone administration are described. This paper finds favors the full insertion of ozone therapy into pharmaceutical sciences, rather than as either an alternative or an esoteric approach.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 139 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 20%
Student > Bachelor 20 14%
Other 12 8%
Researcher 12 8%
Professor 9 6%
Other 31 22%
Unknown 31 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 6 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 4%
Other 28 20%
Unknown 38 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 11 October 2020.
All research outputs
#2,354,484
of 25,576,275 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#125
of 2,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,315
of 279,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#6
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,275 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,274 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 279,366 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.