↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Cervico‐thoracic or lumbar sympathectomy for neuropathic pain and complex regional pain syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2013
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)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
13 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
190 Mendeley
Title
Cervico‐thoracic or lumbar sympathectomy for neuropathic pain and complex regional pain syndrome
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd002918.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sebastian Straube, Sheena Derry, R Andrew Moore, Peter Cole

Abstract

This review is an update of a review first published in Issue 2, 2003, which was substantially updated in Issue 7, 2010. The concept that many neuropathic pain syndromes (traditionally this definition would include complex regional pain syndromes (CRPS)) are "sympathetically maintained pains" has historically led to treatments that interrupt the sympathetic nervous system. Chemical sympathectomies use alcohol or phenol injections to destroy ganglia of the sympathetic chain, while surgical ablation is performed by open removal or electrocoagulation of the sympathetic chain or by minimally invasive procedures using thermal or laser interruption.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 190 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Norway 1 <1%
Unknown 189 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 16%
Other 16 8%
Student > Postgraduate 16 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 8%
Student > Bachelor 15 8%
Other 45 24%
Unknown 53 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 77 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 8%
Psychology 8 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 3%
Neuroscience 4 2%
Other 20 11%
Unknown 59 31%
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 23 October 2022.
All research outputs
#2,324,735
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,772
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,768
of 210,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#107
of 231 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 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 210,423 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 231 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 53% of its contemporaries.