↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Ibuprofen and/or paracetamol (acetaminophen) for pain relief after surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
6 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
132 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
80 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
226 Mendeley
Title
Ibuprofen and/or paracetamol (acetaminophen) for pain relief after surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004624.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edmund Bailey, Helen V Worthington, Arjen van Wijk, Julian M Yates, Paul Coulthard, Zahid Afzal

Abstract

Both paracetamol and ibuprofen are commonly used analgesics for the relief of pain following the surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth (third molars). In 2010, a novel analgesic (marketed as Nuromol) containing both paracetamol and ibuprofen in the same tablet was launched in the United Kingdom, this drug has shown promising results to date and we have chosen to also compare the combined drug with the single drugs using this model. In this review we investigated the optimal doses of both paracetamol and ibuprofen via comparison of both and via comparison with the novel combined drug. We have taken into account the side effect profile of the study drugs. This review will help oral surgeons to decide on which analgesic to prescribe following wisdom tooth removal.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 132 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 226 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
Unknown 225 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 15%
Student > Postgraduate 26 12%
Researcher 23 10%
Student > Bachelor 21 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 7%
Other 40 18%
Unknown 66 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 101 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 6%
Psychology 10 4%
Social Sciences 9 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 2%
Other 16 7%
Unknown 72 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 166. 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 16 February 2023.
All research outputs
#221,004
of 23,798,792 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#369
of 12,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,060
of 311,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5
of 220 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,798,792 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,758 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 311,770 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 220 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 98% of its contemporaries.