↓ Skip to main content

Patterns of regional variation of opioid prescribing in primary care in England: a retrospective observational study

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#26 of 2,217)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
65 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
4 Mendeley
Title
Patterns of regional variation of opioid prescribing in primary care in England: a retrospective observational study
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, February 2018
DOI 10.3399/bjgp18x695057
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luke Mordecai, Carl Reynolds, Liam J Donaldson, Amanda C de C Williams

Abstract

Opioids are a widely prescribed class of drug with potentially harmful short-term and long-term side effects. There are concerns about the amounts of these drugs being prescribed in England given that they are increasingly considered ineffective in the context of long-term non-cancer pain, which is one of the major reasons for their prescription. To assess the amount and type of opioids prescribed in primary care in England, and patterns of regional variation in prescribing. Retrospective observational study using publicly available government data from various sources pertaining to opioids prescribed in primary practice in England and Indices of Social Deprivation. Official government data were analysed for opioid prescriptions from August 2010 to February 2014. The total amount of opioid prescribed was calculated and standardised to allow for geographical comparisons. The total amount of opioid prescribed, in equivalent milligrams of morphine, increased (r= 0.48) over the study period. More opioids were prescribed in the north than in the south of England (r= 0.66,P<0.0001), and more opioids were prescribed in areas of greater social deprivation (r= 0.56,P<0.0001). Long-term opioid prescribing is increasing despite poor efficacy for non-cancer pain, potential harm, and incompatibility with best practice. Questions of equality of care arise from higher prescription rates in the north of England and in areas of greater social deprivation. A national registry of patients with high opioid use would improve patient safety for this high-risk demographic, as well as provide more focused epidemiological data regarding patterns of prescribing.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 65 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 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 4 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 50%
Other 1 25%
Student > Master 1 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 25%
Social Sciences 1 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 25%
Chemistry 1 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 138. 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 11 March 2018.
All research outputs
#72,931
of 9,726,759 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#26
of 2,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,300
of 251,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#3
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,726,759 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,217 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 251,309 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.