↓ Skip to main content

Gut memories: Towards a cognitive neurobiology of irritable bowel syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, July 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
152 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
406 Mendeley
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.
Title
Gut memories: Towards a cognitive neurobiology of irritable bowel syndrome
Published in
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, July 2011
DOI 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2011.07.001
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul J. Kennedy, Gerard Clarke, Eamonn M.M. Quigley, John A. Groeger, Timothy G. Dinan, John F. Cryan

Abstract

The brain and the gut are engaged in continual crosstalk along a number of pathways collectively termed the 'brain-gut axis'. Over recent years it has become increasingly clear that dysregulation of the axis at a number of levels can result in disorders such as irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). With recent advances in neuroimaging technologies, insights into the neurobiology of IBS are beginning to emerge. However the cognitive neurobiology of IBS has remained relatively unexplored to date. In this review we summarise the available data on cognitive function in IBS. Moreover, we specifically address three key pathophysiological factors, namely; stress, immune activation and chronic pain, together with other factors involved in the manifestation of IBS, and explore how each of these components may impact centrally, what neurobiological mechanisms might be involved, and consider the implications for cognitive functioning in IBS. We conclude that each factor addressed could significantly impinge on central nervous system function, supporting the view that future research efforts must be directed towards a detailed assessment of cognitive function in IBS.

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 406 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 8 2%
Netherlands 3 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Kazakhstan 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 384 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 62 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 61 15%
Researcher 56 14%
Student > Bachelor 53 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 27 7%
Other 73 18%
Unknown 74 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 91 22%
Psychology 78 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 50 12%
Neuroscience 27 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 5%
Other 52 13%
Unknown 87 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 February 2018.
All research outputs
#16,048,009
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
#3,381
of 4,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,997
of 128,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
#21
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.4. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 128,350 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.