↓ Skip to main content

Pain after earthquake

Overview of attention for article published in Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 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
Pain after earthquake
Published in
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, June 2012
DOI 10.1186/1757-7241-20-43
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chiara Angeletti, Cristiana Guetti, Roberta Papola, Emiliano Petrucci, Maria Laura Ursini, Alessandra Ciccozzi, Francesca Masi, Maria Rosaria Russo, Salvatore Squarcione, Antonella Paladini, Joseph Pergolizzi, Robert Taylor, Giustino Varrassi, Franco Marinangeli

Abstract

On 6 April 2009, at 03:32 local time, an Mw 6.3 earthquake hit the Abruzzi region of central Italy causing widespread damage in the City of L Aquila and its nearby villages. The earthquake caused 308 casualties and over 1,500 injuries, displaced more than 25,000 people and induced significant damage to more than 10,000 buildings in the L'Aquila region. This observational retrospective study evaluated the prevalence and drug treatment of pain in the five weeks following the L'Aquila earthquake (April 6, 2009). 958 triage documents were analysed for patients pain severity, pain type, and treatment efficacy. A third of pain patients reported pain with a prevalence of 34.6%. More than half of pain patients reported severe pain (58.8%). Analgesic agents were limited to available drugs: anti-inflammatory agents, paracetamol, and weak opioids. Reduction in verbal numerical pain scores within the first 24 hours after treatment was achieved with the medications at hand. Pain prevalence and characterization exhibited a biphasic pattern with acute pain syndromes owing to trauma occurring in the first 15 days after the earthquake; traumatic pain then decreased and re-surged at around week five, owing to rebuilding efforts. In the second through fourth week, reports of pain occurred mainly owing to relapses of chronic conditions. This study indicates that pain is prevalent during natural disasters, may exhibit a discernible pattern over the weeks following the event, and current drug treatments in this region may be adequate for emergency situations.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 4%
Italy 1 2%
Unknown 51 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 17%
Student > Master 9 17%
Other 5 9%
Lecturer 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 12 22%
Unknown 10 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 39%
Social Sciences 5 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Psychology 3 6%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 13 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 19 September 2018.
All research outputs
#6,570,686
of 23,674,309 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#564
of 1,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,941
of 165,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,674,309 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,280 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 165,517 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.