↓ Skip to main content

Designing Interventions Informed by Scientific Knowledge About Effects of Early Adversity: a Translational Neuroscience Agenda for Next-Generation Addictions Research

Overview of attention for article published in Current Addiction Reports, September 2015
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 (80th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Designing Interventions Informed by Scientific Knowledge About Effects of Early Adversity: a Translational Neuroscience Agenda for Next-Generation Addictions Research
Published in
Current Addiction Reports, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s40429-015-0071-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Philip A. Fisher, Elliot T. Berkman

Abstract

In spite of extensive scientific knowledge about the neurobiological systems and neural pathways underlying addictions, only limited progress has been made to reduce the population-level incidence of addictions by using prevention and treatment programs. In this area of research the translation of basic neuroscience of causal mechanisms to effective interventions has not been fully realized. In this article we describe how an understanding of the effects of early adverse experiences on brain and biological development may provide new opportunities to achieve impact at scale with respect to reduction of addictions. We propose four categories of new knowledge that translational neuroscience investigations of addictions should incorporate to be successful. We then describe a translational neuroscience-informed smoking cessation intervention based on this model.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users 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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 13%
Other 2 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 10 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Unspecified 1 4%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 09 March 2016.
All research outputs
#4,574,501
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Current Addiction Reports
#102
of 387 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,135
of 286,908 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Addiction Reports
#8
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 387 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 286,908 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 80% of its contemporaries.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.