↓ Skip to main content

Theory of Mind in Patients with Epilepsy: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychology Review, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
150 Mendeley
Title
Theory of Mind in Patients with Epilepsy: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Published in
Neuropsychology Review, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11065-015-9313-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth Stewart, Cathy Catroppa, Suncica Lah

Abstract

The ability to understand our own thoughts, intentions, beliefs and emotions and those of others (Theory of Mind; ToM) is a high-order social cognitive skill that is vital for social interaction and which has been found to be impaired in patients with epilepsy. Studies examining ToM in patients with epilepsy, however, have yielded inconsistent findings. The main aim of this study is to determine whether the magnitude of ToM deficits varies as a function of the site of epilepsy focus and/or the type of ToM task used. Electronic databases searches included Psychinfo, Medline/PubMed and EMBASE. Studies were included if they examined a group of patients with epilepsy and a group of healthy controls, reported original research, were published in the English language in peer reviewed journals, and used one of five empirically validated measures of ToM: False Belief, Reading the Mind in the Eyes Task (RMET), Faux-pas, Strange Stories, Cartoon ToM vignettes. Twelve studies were identified, ten included adults and two included children with epilepsy. Findings revealed marked ToM deficits in adults with focal seizures emanating from core brain regions underpinning ToM: temporal and frontal lobes (frontal lobe epilepsy, FLE; temporal lobe epilepsy, TLE), but not in adults with focal seizures outside the temporal and frontal lobes (extra-TLE/FLE). ToM deficits were also observed in children with generalised seizures (idiopathic generalised epilepsy, IGE). ToM deficits were documented across ToM tasks. In conclusion, ToM deficits represent a robust finding in adults with frontal and temporal epilepsy, but are also found in children with generalised seizures. Further research into ToM is needed, especially in children with epilepsy as early ToM may have cumulative, negative effects on development of social skills that continues into adulthood.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 150 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 148 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 23 15%
Student > Master 22 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 13%
Researcher 16 11%
Student > Bachelor 16 11%
Other 22 15%
Unknown 31 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 49 33%
Neuroscience 22 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 13%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 2%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 37 25%
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 27 November 2017.
All research outputs
#15,023,141
of 25,152,132 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychology Review
#332
of 491 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,816
of 406,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychology Review
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,152,132 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 491 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 406,552 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.