↓ Skip to main content

Social use of language in children with reactive attachment disorder and autism spectrum disorders

Overview of attention for article published in European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
157 Mendeley
Title
Social use of language in children with reactive attachment disorder and autism spectrum disorders
Published in
European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, March 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00787-012-0259-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fareeha Amber Sadiq, Louise Slator, David Skuse, James Law, Christopher Gillberg, Helen Minnis

Abstract

Children with a diagnosis of reactive attachment disorder (RAD) appear to show difficulties in social understanding. We aimed to compare the pragmatic language functioning of children with (RAD) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Assessments were made in three groups of children aged 5-8 years, with verbal IQ estimates in the normal range: 35 with a RAD diagnosis, 52 with an ASD diagnosis and 39 with typical development. The Children's Communication Checklist (CCC) was used to compare their pragmatic language skills, and ADI-R algorithms were used to compare autistic symptomatology, according to parent report. According to the CCC, the RAD group demonstrated significant problems in their use of context, rapport and social relationships with a degree of severity equivalent to children in the ASD comparison group. More than 60% of the group with RAD met ADI-R clinical criteria on the Use of Language and Other Social Communication Skills subscale, 46% on the Reciprocal Social Interaction subscale, and 20% had significant repetitive and stereotyped behaviours. Children with RAD appear to be at least as impaired as children with ASD in certain domains of social relatedness, particularly in their pragmatic language skills.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
United States 2 1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 151 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 11%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Researcher 14 9%
Other 36 23%
Unknown 26 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 59 38%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 13%
Social Sciences 20 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 6%
Neuroscience 7 4%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 26 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 April 2016.
All research outputs
#7,070,186
of 24,585,562 outputs
Outputs from European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
#776
of 1,777 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,181
of 159,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
#7
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,585,562 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,777 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 159,804 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 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 71% of its contemporaries.