| Title |
Intraoperative local anaesthesia for reduction of postoperative pain following general anaesthesia for dental treatment in children and adolescents
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009742.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Susan Parekh, Collette Gardener, Paul F Ashley, Tanya Walsh |
| Abstract |
Whilst carrying out dental procedures under general anaesthesia (GA), practitioners routinely give local anaesthetics (LA) intraoperatively to children. Local anaesthetics are used to help manage postoperative pain and reduce bleeding and the physiological response to procedures. Studies of effectiveness of intraoperative LA to date have reported contradictory results. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 9 | 23% |
| Canada | 4 | 10% |
| United States | 3 | 8% |
| India | 2 | 5% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Ireland | 1 | 3% |
| Denmark | 1 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Colombia | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 13 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 25 | 64% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 13 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 321 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 321 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 44 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 8% |
| Researcher | 20 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 19 | 6% |
| Other | 74 | 23% |
| Unknown | 108 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 87 | 27% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 30 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 19 | 6% |
| Psychology | 16 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 3% |
| Other | 33 | 10% |
| Unknown | 126 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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 17 July 2019.
All research outputs
#1,124,347
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,312
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,400
of 360,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#54
of 280 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 360,354 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 280 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.