↓ Skip to main content

Neuropathic Pain: Is Quantitative Sensory Testing Helpful?

Overview of attention for article published in Current Diabetes Reports, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 Mendeley
Title
Neuropathic Pain: Is Quantitative Sensory Testing Helpful?
Published in
Current Diabetes Reports, May 2012
DOI 10.1007/s11892-012-0282-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elena K. Krumova, Christian Geber, Andrea Westermann, Christoph Maier

Abstract

Neuropathic pain arises as a consequence of a lesion or disease affecting the somatosensory system and is characterised by a combination of positive and negative sensory symptoms. Quantitative sensory testing (QST) examines the sensory perception after application of different mechanical and thermal stimuli of controlled intensity and the function of both large (A-beta) and small (A-delta and C) nerve fibres, including the corresponding central pathways. QST can be used to determine detection, pain thresholds and stimulus-response curves and can thus detect both negative and positive sensory signs, the second ones not being assessed by other methods. Similarly to all other psychophysical tests QST requires standardised examination, instructions and data evaluation to receive valid and reliable results. Since normative data are available, QST can contribute also to the individual diagnosis of neuropathy, especially in the case of isolated small-fibre neuropathy, in contrast to the conventional electrophysiology which assesses only large myelinated fibres. For example, detection of early stages of subclinical neuropathy in symptomatic or asymptomatic patients with diabetes mellitus can be helpful to optimise treatment and identify diabetic foot at risk of ulceration. QST assessed the individual's sensory profile and thus can be valuable to evaluate the underlying pain mechanisms which occur in different frequencies even in the same neuropathic pain syndromes. Furthermore, assessing the exact sensory phenotype by QST might be useful in the future to identify responders to certain treatments in accordance to the underlying pain mechanisms.

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 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 113 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 18%
Student > Master 20 17%
Researcher 16 14%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 10%
Other 35 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 60 52%
Unspecified 18 16%
Neuroscience 10 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Other 13 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 24 December 2014.
All research outputs
#2,101,277
of 12,574,825 outputs
Outputs from Current Diabetes Reports
#119
of 695 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,453
of 178,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Diabetes Reports
#5
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,574,825 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 695 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 178,075 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 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 73% of its contemporaries.