↓ Skip to main content

Translational Research in Pain and Itch

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 9: Advances in the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain
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 (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
149 Mendeley
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.
Chapter title
Advances in the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain
Chapter number 9
Book title
Translational Research in Pain and Itch
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/978-94-017-7537-3_9
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-9-40-177535-9, 978-9-40-177537-3
Authors

Xu, Li, Zhang, Yuguan, Huang, Yuguang, Li Xu, Yuguan Zhang, Yuguang Huang

Abstract

Neuropathic pain is pain that arises as a direct consequence of a lesion or diseases affecting the somatosensory system. Treatments for neuropathic pain include pharmacological, nonpharmacological, and interventional therapies. Currently recommended first-line pharmacological treatments include antidepressants and anticonvulsants (gabapentin and pregabalin). However, in some cases, pharmacological therapy alone fails to give adequate control of the chronic pain. New techniques have been invented and have been proved effective on neuropathic pain, such as behavioral, cognitive, integrative, and physical therapies. In this review, we focused on the advances in the treatment of central neuropathic pain, diabetic peripheral neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, and cancer pain.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 148 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 25 17%
Student > Master 16 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 8%
Researcher 11 7%
Other 8 5%
Other 18 12%
Unknown 59 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 11%
Neuroscience 9 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 4%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 62 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 July 2021.
All research outputs
#2,709,008
of 22,851,489 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#418
of 4,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,432
of 393,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#53
of 443 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,851,489 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,950 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 393,602 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 443 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.