The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Update palliative Schmerztherapie
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Die Innere Medizin, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00108-016-0126-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
R. Rolke, S. Rolke, S. Hiddemann, M. Mücke, H. Cuhls, L. Radbruch, F. Elsner, V. Peuckmann-Post |
| Abstract |
Cancer pain and pain associated with non-neoplastic diseases can be associated with pain mechanisms, such as a peripheral or central sensitization or deafferentation. The clarification allows indirect conclusions about the underlying mechanisms based on clinical signs, such as allodynia or hyperalgesia. Non-opioid analgesics are the basis of cancer pain therapy according to the World Health Organization (WHO) pain ladder. In the case of severe cancer pain, treatment can be escalated directly from level 1 to level 3. Opioids are highly effective for the treatment of cancer pain even with a neuropathic component, which can occur in up to 40 % of cases as amixed pain syndrome. Coanalgesics represent a valuable therapeutic adjunct for better pain control and can address treatment of comorbidities, such as anxiety, depression and sleep disorders. When liver and/or renal function is reduced, the dosage of many drugs has to be adapted. Treatment of multimorbid or critically ill patients with opioids and antidepressants/anticonvulsants requires consideration of numerous possible pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic interactions. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 22% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 13% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 8 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 34% |
| Psychology | 3 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 7 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 29 August 2017.
All research outputs
#15,925,930
of 26,505,350 outputs
Outputs from Die Innere Medizin
#211
of 513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,753
of 346,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Die Innere Medizin
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,505,350 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 513 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 346,481 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.