↓ Skip to main content

Lewy Body Disease: Clinical and Pathological “Overlap Syndrome” Between Synucleinopathies (Parkinson Disease) and Tauopathies (Alzheimer Disease)

Overview of attention for article published in Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
Title
Lewy Body Disease: Clinical and Pathological “Overlap Syndrome” Between Synucleinopathies (Parkinson Disease) and Tauopathies (Alzheimer Disease)
Published in
Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11910-018-0835-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Clovis Foguem, Patrick Manckoundia

Abstract

Lewy body disease (LBD) is a neurodegenerative disease resulting in dementia. It shares clinical and pathological features with Parkinson disease (PD), the most frequent synucleinopathy, Parkinson disease dementia (PDD), and Alzheimer disease (AD), a tauopathy. Even though the diagnostic criteria for these neurodegenerative diseases are clearly established, and recently revised for LBD, their precise clinical diagnosis is often difficult because LBD, PD, PDD, and AD share epidemiological, clinical, and pathological characteristics. This manuscript discusses current understanding of overlapping symptoms and the particular features of LBD, PD, and AD. It also describes features that could facilitate the diagnosis of each of these diseases. We concluded that the concept of neurodegenerative "overlap" syndrome, which includes the accepted diagnosis of LBD, may be taken in account and should contribute to clarifying LBD and definitions of close differential diagnoses. This should allow clinicians to suspect LBD at an earlier stage and provide better patient care.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 68 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 24%
Student > Bachelor 11 16%
Other 6 9%
Researcher 6 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 14 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 11 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 13%
Psychology 7 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 21 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 18 July 2023.
All research outputs
#2,313,670
of 24,079,362 outputs
Outputs from Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports
#123
of 954 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,489
of 332,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports
#4
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,079,362 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 954 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 332,631 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 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.