↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Levomepromazine for nausea and vomiting in palliative care

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 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 (90th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
33 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
Title
Levomepromazine for nausea and vomiting in palliative care
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009420.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lalage Cox, Emily Darvill, Saskie Dorman

Abstract

This is updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in Issue 4, 2013, on Levomepromazine for nausea and vomiting in palliative care.Nausea and vomiting are common, distressing symptoms for patients receiving palliative care. There are several drugs which can be used to treat these symptoms, known as antiemetics. Levomepromazine is an antipsychotic drug is commonly used as an antiemetic to alleviate nausea and vomiting in palliative care settings. To evaluate the efficacy of, and adverse events associated with, levomepromazine for the treatment of nausea and vomiting in palliative care patients. For this update we searched electronic databases, including those of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE, up to February 2015. We searched clinical trial registers on 7 October 2015 for ongoing trials. Randomised controlled trials of levomepromazine for the treatment of nausea or vomiting, or both, in adults receiving palliative care. We excluded studies in which symptoms were thought to be due to pregnancy or surgery. We assessed the potential relevance of studies based on titles and abstracts. We obtained copies of any study reports that appeared to meet the inclusion criteria for further assessment. At least two review authors read each paper to determine suitability for inclusion and discussed discrepancies in order to achieve a consensus. In the original review, we identified 421 abstracts using the search strategy. We considered eight studies for inclusion but ultimately excluded them all from the review. We updated the search in February 2015 and identified 35 abstracts, but again none met the inclusion criteria. We identified two trials from clinical trial registers, one of which is ongoing and one of which was closed due to poor recruitment. As in the initial review, we identified no published randomised controlled trials examining the use of levomepromazine for the management of nausea and vomiting in adults receiving palliative care, and our conclusion (that further studies of levomepromazine and other antiemetic agents are needed to provide better evidence for their use in this setting) remains unchanged. We did, however, identify one ongoing study that we hope will contribute to the evidence base for this intervention in future updates of this review.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Colombia 1 1%
Unknown 74 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 12%
Researcher 8 11%
Other 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 15 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 22%
Psychology 4 5%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Computer Science 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 14 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 28 May 2016.
All research outputs
#1,244,388
of 17,443,211 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,230
of 11,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,666
of 291,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#99
of 250 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,443,211 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,692 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 291,339 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 250 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.