↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

As required versus fixed schedule analgesic administration for postoperative pain in children

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2015
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 (89th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
173 Mendeley
Title
As required versus fixed schedule analgesic administration for postoperative pain in children
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011404.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna Erskine, Philip J Wiffen, Joy A Conlon

Abstract

Acute postoperative pain occurs as a result of tissue damage following surgery. Administering the appropriate analgesia to children is a complex process and it is unclear whether children's postoperative pain is more successfully treated by using 'as required' (when pain occurs) (termed 'pro re nata' or PRN) or (irrespective of pain at the time of administration).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 173 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 173 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 37 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 9%
Researcher 13 8%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Other 10 6%
Other 35 20%
Unknown 49 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 59 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 10%
Psychology 13 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 17 10%
Unknown 59 34%

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 June 2021.
All research outputs
#1,812,837
of 21,406,274 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,132
of 12,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,873
of 230,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#98
of 246 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,406,274 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,049 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 230,279 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 246 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 60% of its contemporaries.