| Title |
On visual hallucinations and cortical networks: a trans-diagnostic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Neurology, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00415-015-7687-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rowena Carter, Dominic H. ffytche |
| Abstract |
Our current clinical approach to visual hallucinations is largely derived from work carried out by Georges de Morsier in the 1930s. Now, almost a century after his influential papers, we have the research tools to further explore the ideas he put forward. In this review, we address de Morsier's proposal that visual hallucinations in all clinical conditions have a similar neurological mechanism by comparing structural imaging studies of susceptibility to visual hallucinations in Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, Dementia with Lewy bodies and schizophrenia. Systematic review of the literature was undertaken using PubMed searches. A total of 18 studies across conditions were identified reporting grey matter differences between patients with and without visual hallucinations. Grey matter changes were categorised into brain regions relevant to current theories of visual hallucinations. The distribution of cortical atrophy supports de Morsier's premise that visual hallucinations are invariably linked to aberrant activity within visual thalamo-cortical networks. Further work is required to determine by what mechanism these networks become predisposed to spontaneous activation, and whether the frontal lobe and hippocampal changes identified are present in all conditions. The findings have implications for the development of effective treatments for visual hallucinations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 Kingdom | 2 | 29% |
| Germany | 1 | 14% |
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 131 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 9% |
| Other | 22 | 17% |
| Unknown | 35 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 29 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 20% |
| Psychology | 23 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Unknown | 42 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 21 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,958,641
of 23,570,677 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurology
#304
of 4,604 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,073
of 262,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurology
#1
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,570,677 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,604 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 262,229 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.