↓ Skip to main content

Multifactorial inheritance, rates of maturation and psychiatry’s taxonomic dilemma

Overview of attention for article published in European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, May 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
Multifactorial inheritance, rates of maturation and psychiatry’s taxonomic dilemma
Published in
European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, May 2008
DOI 10.1007/s00406-008-2005-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marten W. deVries

Abstract

This paper reviews aspects of Letten F. Saugstad's Maturation Theory in relation to the Kraepelinian dichotomy and psychiatric classification. The maturation theory is based on existing neuroscience, cross-national and mental health case register data and offers an innovative alternative to current etiological formulations. The maturational theory holds (1) that manic depressive illness relates to early maturation and (2) the schizophrenic syndrome relates to late maturation. The foundation of these processes lies in cerebral pruning of excitatory synapses particularly at puberty but also at a number of earlier crucial periods in development. The process of synaptic pruning has by puberty eliminated some 40% of the synapses, leading to the disappearance of glutematergic excitatory synapses without apparently appreciably influencing inhibitory GABAergic neurons. As a consequence, early maturation is related to the manic-depressive syndrome and characterized by increased neural excitability. Conversely, late maturation is related to schizophrenia characterized by diminished neural activity. Saugstad demonstrates using cross-national and neuroscience studies the multifactoral and environmental influences on rates of maturation and thereby mental illness. Using these data Saugstad reasons her agreement with the Kraepelinian dichotomy based on the existence of two extremes in brain structure and function developed through interactions between the person and the environment.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 6%
Unknown 15 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 13%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 3 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 4 25%
Neuroscience 2 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Philosophy 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 5 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 29 November 2023.
All research outputs
#7,856,604
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience
#462
of 1,243 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,452
of 83,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience
#7
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,243 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 83,934 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.