| Title |
Non‐antiepileptic drugs for trigeminal neuralgia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd004029.pub4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jingjing Zhang, Mi Yang, Muke Zhou, Li He, Ning Chen, Joanna M Zakrzewska |
| Abstract |
Trigeminal neuralgia was defined by the International Association for the Study of Pain as a sudden, usually unilateral, severe, brief, stabbing recurrent pain in the distribution of one or more branches of the fifth cranial nerve. Standard treatment is with anti-epileptic drugs. Non-antiepileptic drugs have been used in the management of trigeminal neuralgia since the 1970s. This is an update of a review first published in 2006 and previously updated in 2011. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 4 | 40% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 177 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 27 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 13% |
| Researcher | 15 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 35 | 20% |
| Unknown | 55 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 62 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 22 | 12% |
| Unknown | 66 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 22 December 2021.
All research outputs
#6,523,392
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,793
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,702
of 320,664 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#148
of 206 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
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 is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 320,664 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 206 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.