↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Options for perioperative pain management in neurosurgery

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, February 2016
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 (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
20 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 Mendeley
Title
Options for perioperative pain management in neurosurgery
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, February 2016
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s85782
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nalini Vadivelu, Alice M Kai, Daniel Tran, Gopal Kodumudi, Aron Legler, Eugenia Ayrian

Abstract

Moderate-to-severe pain following neurosurgery is common but often does not get attention and is therefore underdiagnosed and undertreated. Compounding this problem is the traditional belief that neurosurgical pain is inconsequential and even dangerous to treat. Concerns about problematic effects associated with opioid analgesics such as nausea, vomiting, oversedation, and increased intracranial pressure secondary to elevated carbon dioxide tension from respiratory depression have often led to suboptimal postoperative analgesic strategies in caring for neurosurgical patients. Neurosurgical patients may have difficulty or be incapable of communicating their need for analgesics due to neurologic deficits, which poses an additional challenge. Postoperative pain control should be a priority, because pain adversely affects recovery and patient outcomes. Inconsistent practices and the quality of current analgesic strategies for neurosurgical patients still leave room for improvement. Given the complexity of postoperative pain management for these patients, multimodal strategies are often required to optimize pain control and at the same time limit undesired side effects.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 137 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 15 11%
Student > Bachelor 15 11%
Student > Master 14 10%
Other 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 28 20%
Unknown 46 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 7%
Neuroscience 9 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 1%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 50 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 05 September 2019.
All research outputs
#2,329,938
of 25,552,933 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#274
of 1,996 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,672
of 407,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#6
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,552,933 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 1,996 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 407,379 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 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 72% of its contemporaries.