↓ Skip to main content

Pathophysiology and medical treatment of pain in fibrous dysplasia of bone

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
88 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 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
Pathophysiology and medical treatment of pain in fibrous dysplasia of bone
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, May 2012
DOI 10.1186/1750-1172-7-s1-s3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roland D Chapurlat, Deborah Gensburger, Juan M Jimenez-Andrade, Joseph R Ghilardi, Marilyn Kelly, Patrick Mantyh

Abstract

One of the most common complications of fibrous dysplasia of bone (FD) is bone pain. Usual pain killers are often of inadequate efficacy to control this bone pain. The mechanism of bone pain in FD remains uncertain, but by analogy with bone tumors one may consider that ectopic sprouting and formation of neuroma-like structures by sensory and sympathetic nerve fibers also occur in the dysplastic skeleton. Bone pain has been reported in up to 81% of adults and 49% of children. It affects predominantly the lower limbs and the spine. The degree of pain is highly variable and adults reports more pain than children. Bisphosphonates have been shown to reduce bone pain in uncontrolled studies. Their influence on bone strength remains unknown. In a randomized trial testing alendronate, bone pain was not significantly improved. Another trial assessing the effect of risedronate is ongoing. Possible future therapies include tocilizumab, denosumab and drugs targeting nerve growth factor and its receptor TrkA.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 77 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 10%
Student > Master 8 10%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 17 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 20 25%

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 02 April 2016.
All research outputs
#3,217,681
of 7,476,637 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#526
of 1,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,688
of 235,564 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#24
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,476,637 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 55th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,052 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 235,564 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.