↓ Skip to main content

Neuropsychological function in individuals with morbid obesity: a cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Obesity, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#34 of 179)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
Title
Neuropsychological function in individuals with morbid obesity: a cross-sectional study
Published in
BMC Obesity, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40608-017-0143-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hanna L. Sargénius, Stian Lydersen, Knut Hestad

Abstract

Previous research has shown cognitive dysfunction to be present in a significant number of individuals with obesity. The objective of this study was to assess the neuropsychological profile of morbidly obese patients referred to weight-loss treatment. An extensive battery of neuropsychological tests with well-known normative data covering various cognitive domains was administered to 96 patients. The test results were transformed to z-scores for comparisons with normative data. As a means of determining level of cognitive impairment within the group, deficit scores were applied. Group comparisons on the different cognitive domains were conducted between patients with depressive symptoms and patients reporting no such symptoms. As illustrated in mean z-scores, the patients demonstrated lower performance compared to normative data on visual memory (mean -.26, CI -.43 to -.09, p = .003), speed of information processing (mean -.22, CI -.34 to -.09, p = .001), executive functions (mean -.28, CI -.40 to -.16, p < .001), and attention/vigilance (mean -.25, CI -.37 to -.13, p < .001). Their performance was good on verbal fluency (mean .24, CI .04 to .44, p = .016) and verbal memory (mean .55, CI .38 to .72, p < .001). No significant performance differences were observed in the cognitive domains of visuospatial ability, motor function, and working memory. The deficit scores, however, revealed working memory and motor function to be significantly impaired within the group as well. Patients with depressive symptoms differed from patients without such symptoms on visual memory (mean .43, CI .07 to .80, p = .021). Some characteristic cognitive weaknesses and strengths were evident at the group level, although pronounced variation was observed. Deficits in executive functions, information processing, and attention should be taken into consideration in clinical practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 87 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 17%
Student > Bachelor 13 15%
Researcher 11 13%
Student > Master 10 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 17 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 20 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 15%
Neuroscience 10 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Unspecified 5 6%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 24 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 26 February 2018.
All research outputs
#2,792,926
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Obesity
#34
of 179 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,565
of 423,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Obesity
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 179 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. 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 423,110 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.