↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Methadone maintenance therapy versus no opioid replacement therapy for opioid dependence

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2009
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 (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
13 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
policy
6 policy sources
twitter
66 tweeters
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
918 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
632 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
Title
Methadone maintenance therapy versus no opioid replacement therapy for opioid dependence
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2009
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd002209.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard P Mattick, Courtney Breen, Jo Kimber, Marina Davoli

Abstract

Methadone maintenance was the first widely used opioid replacement therapy to treat heroin dependence, and it remains the best-researched treatment for this problem. Despite the widespread use of methadone in maintenance treatment for opioid dependence in many countries, it is a controversial treatment whose effectiveness has been disputed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 66 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 632 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Puerto Rico 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 619 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 111 18%
Student > Bachelor 89 14%
Researcher 87 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 75 12%
Other 47 7%
Other 144 23%
Unknown 79 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 217 34%
Psychology 83 13%
Social Sciences 56 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 41 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 31 5%
Other 91 14%
Unknown 113 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 212. 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 01 June 2021.
All research outputs
#103,166
of 18,068,324 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#197
of 11,815 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#508
of 137,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2
of 109 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,068,324 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 11,815 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 137,733 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 109 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 99% of its contemporaries.