↓ Skip to main content

Cohort protocol paper: The Pain and Opioids In Treatment (POINT) study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#24 of 370)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 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
Cohort protocol paper: The Pain and Opioids In Treatment (POINT) study
Published in
BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology, March 2014
DOI 10.1186/2050-6511-15-17
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gabrielle Campbell, Richard Mattick, Raimondo Bruno, Briony Larance, Suzanne Nielsen, Milton Cohen, Nicholas Lintzeris, Fiona Shand, Wayne D Hall, Bianca Hoban, Chyanne Kehler, Michael Farrell, Louisa Degenhardt

Abstract

Internationally, there is concern about the increased prescribing of pharmaceutical opioids for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). In part, this is related to limited knowledge about the long-term benefits and outcomes of opioid use for CNCP. There has also been increased injection of some pharmaceutical opioids by people who inject drugs, and for some patients, the development of problematic and/or dependent use. To date, much of the research on the use of pharmaceutical opioids among people with CNCP, have been clinical trials that have excluded patients with complex needs, and have been of limited duration (i.e. fewer than 12 weeks). The Pain and Opioids In Treatment (POINT) study is unique study that aims to: 1) examine patterns of opioid use in a cohort of patients prescribed opioids for CNCP; 2) examine demographic and clinical predictors of adverse events, including opioid abuse or dependence, medication diversion, other drug use, and overdose; and 3) identify factors predicting poor pain relief and other outcomes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Unknown 122 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 25 20%
Student > Master 18 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 11%
Researcher 13 10%
Other 10 8%
Other 22 18%
Unknown 22 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 35%
Psychology 18 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 8%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 24 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 09 April 2021.
All research outputs
#1,432,927
of 19,026,578 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology
#24
of 370 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,882
of 200,521 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,026,578 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 370 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 200,521 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them