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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Automatic Auditory Processing Deficits in Schizophrenia and Clinical High-Risk Patients: Forecasting Psychosis Risk with Mismatch Negativity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biological Psychiatry, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.biopsych.2013.07.038 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Veronica B. Perez, Scott W. Woods, Brian J. Roach, Judith M. Ford, Thomas H. McGlashan, Vinod H. Srihari, Daniel H. Mathalon |
| Abstract |
Only about one third of patients at high risk for psychosis based on current clinical criteria convert to a psychotic disorder within a 2.5-year follow-up period. Targeting clinical high-risk (CHR) individuals for preventive interventions could expose many to unnecessary treatments, underscoring the need to enhance predictive accuracy with nonclinical measures. Candidate measures include event-related potential components with established sensitivity to schizophrenia. Here, we examined the mismatch negativity (MMN) component of the event-related potential elicited automatically by auditory deviance in CHR and early illness schizophrenia (ESZ) patients. We also examined whether MMN predicted subsequent conversion to psychosis in CHR patients. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 25% |
| Chile | 1 | 13% |
| Egypt | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 158 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 39 | 24% |
| Researcher | 33 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 12% |
| Other | 16 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 26 | 16% |
| Unknown | 19 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 37 | 23% |
| Neuroscience | 36 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 20% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 7% |
| Unknown | 38 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 61. 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 20 November 2016.
All research outputs
#699,400
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from Biological Psychiatry
#470
of 6,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,558
of 199,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological Psychiatry
#17
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,596 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 199,085 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 125 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.