↓ Skip to main content

Functional Plasticity in Childhood Brain Disorders: When, What, How, and Whom to Assess

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychology Review, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
184 Mendeley
Title
Functional Plasticity in Childhood Brain Disorders: When, What, How, and Whom to Assess
Published in
Neuropsychology Review, May 2014
DOI 10.1007/s11065-014-9261-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maureen Dennis, Brenda J. Spiegler, Nevena Simic, Katia J. Sinopoli, Amy Wilkinson, Keith Owen Yeates, H. Gerry Taylor, Erin D. Bigler, Jack M. Fletcher

Abstract

At every point in the lifespan, the brain balances malleable processes representing neural plasticity that promote change with homeostatic processes that promote stability. Whether a child develops typically or with brain injury, his or her neural and behavioral outcome is constructed through transactions between plastic and homeostatic processes and the environment. In clinical research with children in whom the developing brain has been malformed or injured, behavioral outcomes provide an index of the result of plasticity, homeostasis, and environmental transactions. When should we assess outcome in relation to age at brain insult, time since brain insult, and age of the child at testing? What should we measure? Functions involving reacting to the past and predicting the future, as well as social-affective skills, are important. How should we assess outcome? Information from performance variability, direct measures and informants, overt and covert measures, and laboratory and ecological measures should be considered. In whom are we assessing outcome? Assessment should be cognizant of individual differences in gene, socio-economic status (SES), parenting, nutrition, and interpersonal supports, which are moderators that interact with other factors influencing functional outcome.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 184 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 183 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 14%
Researcher 22 12%
Student > Bachelor 18 10%
Other 10 5%
Other 31 17%
Unknown 49 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 59 32%
Neuroscience 19 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 3%
Other 22 12%
Unknown 56 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 January 2015.
All research outputs
#18,375,064
of 22,758,963 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychology Review
#396
of 453 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,826
of 226,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychology Review
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,963 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 453 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 226,933 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.