↓ Skip to main content

When higher doses in opioid replacement treatment are still inadequate – association to multidimensional illness severity: a cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
When higher doses in opioid replacement treatment are still inadequate – association to multidimensional illness severity: a cohort study
Published in
Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, February 2014
DOI 10.1186/1747-597x-9-13
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jens Reimer, Eduard Boniakowski, Christian Bachner, Bernd Weber, Wieland Tietje, Uwe Verthein, Stephan Walcher

Abstract

Opioid replacement treatment (ORT) with methadone is regarded as gold standard in the treatment of opioid addiction. Treatment doses of 60 mg methadone per day and above are associated with better treatment retention and reduction in the use of heroin and cocaine. However, an absolute dose level cannot function as parameter for adequate dosing. This study aims to determine dose adequacy in a sample of patients on stable methadone treatment, and to relate dose adequacy to disease severity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 38 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 13%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 10%
Other 12 31%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 28%
Psychology 6 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 10%
Neuroscience 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 8 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 18 March 2014.
All research outputs
#5,664,940
of 22,745,803 outputs
Outputs from Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy
#307
of 666 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,134
of 221,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,745,803 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 666 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 221,024 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.