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 |
Review of the assessment and management of neonatal abstinence syndrome
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1940-0640-9-19 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sarah Mary Bagley, Elisha M Wachman, Erica Holland, Susan B Brogly |
| Abstract |
Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) secondary to in-utero opioid exposure is an increasing problem. Variability in assessment and treatment of NAS has been attributed to the lack of high-quality evidence to guide management of exposed neonates. This systematic review examines available evidence for NAS assessment tools, nonpharmacologic interventions, and pharmacologic management of opioid-exposed infants. There is limited data on the inter-observer reliability of NAS assessment tools due to lack of a standardized approach. In addition, most scales were developed prior to the prevalent use of prescribed prenatal concomitant medications, which can complicate NAS assessment. Nonpharmacologic interventions, particularly breastfeeding, may decrease NAS severity. Opioid medications such as morphine or methadone are recommended as first-line therapy, with phenobarbital or clonidine as second-line adjunctive therapy. Further research is needed to determine best practices for assessment, nonpharmacologic intervention, and pharmacologic management of infants with NAS in order to improve outcomes. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 215 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 213 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 32 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 29 | 13% |
| Researcher | 24 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 8% |
| Other | 18 | 8% |
| Other | 41 | 19% |
| Unknown | 53 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 68 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 45 | 21% |
| Psychology | 9 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 21 | 10% |
| Unknown | 59 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 02 May 2019.
All research outputs
#1,271,623
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
#48
of 487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,102
of 249,808 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 487 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 249,808 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.