↓ Skip to main content

Early Life Adversity as a Risk Factor for Visceral Pain in Later Life: Importance of Sex Differences

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
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.
Title
Early Life Adversity as a Risk Factor for Visceral Pain in Later Life: Importance of Sex Differences
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2013.00013
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aaron Chaloner, Beverley Greenwood-Van Meerveld

Abstract

A history of early life adversity (ELA) has health-related consequences that persist beyond the initial maltreatment and into adulthood. Childhood adversity is associated with abnormal glucocorticoid signaling within the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis and the development of functional pain disorders such as the irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). IBS and many adult psychopathologies are more frequently diagnosed in women, and ovarian hormones have been shown to modulate pain sensitivity. Therefore, the sexually dimorphic effects of ELA and the role of ovarian hormones in visceral pain perception represent critical research concepts to enhance our understanding of the etiology of IBS. In this review, we discuss current animal models of ELA and the potential mechanisms through which ovarian hormones modulate the HPA axis to alter nociceptive signaling pathways and induce functionally relevant changes in pain behaviors following ELA.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Ireland 1 1%
Unknown 86 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 16%
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Master 10 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 21 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 19%
Psychology 16 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 11%
Neuroscience 7 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 26 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 03 December 2013.
All research outputs
#16,722,190
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#7,425
of 11,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,799
of 289,007 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#150
of 246 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,541 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 289,007 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.