↓ Skip to main content

Peripheral Administration of Morphine Attenuates Postincisional Pain by Regulating Macrophage Polarization through COX-2-Dependent Pathway

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Pain, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Peripheral Administration of Morphine Attenuates Postincisional Pain by Regulating Macrophage Polarization through COX-2-Dependent Pathway
Published in
Molecular Pain, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1744-8069-10-36
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kohei Godai, Maiko Hasegawa-Moriyama, Tae Kurimoto, Takayuki Saito, Tomotsugu Yamada, Takahiro Sato, Masayasu Kojima, Yuichi Kanmura

Abstract

Macrophage infiltration to inflammatory sites promotes wound repair and may be involved in pain hypersensitivity after surgical incision. We recently reported that the development of hyperalgesia during chronic inflammation is regulated by macrophage polarity, often referred to as proinflammatory (M1) or anti-inflammatory (M2) macrophages. Although opioids such as morphine are known to alter the inflammatory milieu of incisional wounds through interactions with immunocytes, the macrophage-mediated effects of morphine on the development of postincisional pain have not been well investigated. In this study, we examined how morphine alters pain hypersensitivity through phenotypic shifts in local macrophages during the course of incision-induced inflammation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Researcher 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 3 7%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 9 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 12 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 June 2014.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Pain
#372
of 669 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,808
of 319,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Pain
#30
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 669 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 319,271 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.