| Title |
Cognitive Dysfunction in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: a Review of Recent Evidence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Rheumatology Reports, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11926-016-0577-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Erin Cvejic, Rachael C. Birch, Uté Vollmer-Conna |
| Abstract |
Cognitive difficulties represent a common and debilitating feature of the enigmatic chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). These difficulties manifest as self-reported problems with attention, memory, and concentration and present objectively as slowed information processing speed particularly on complex tasks requiring sustained attention. The mechanisms underlying cognitive dysfunction remain to be established; however, alterations in autonomic nervous system activity and cerebral blood flow have been proposed as possibilities. Heterogeneity in the experience of cognitive impairment, as well as differences in the methods utilised to quantify dysfunction, may contribute to the difficulties in establishing plausible biological underpinnings. The development of a brief neurocognitive battery specifically tailored to CFS and adoption by the international research community would be beneficial in establishing a profile of cognitive dysfunction. This could also provide better insights into the underlying biological mechanisms of cognitive dysfunction in CFS and enhance the development of targeted treatments. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Norway | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 84 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Researcher | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 23% |
| Unknown | 23 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 18 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 11% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Unknown | 27 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 47. 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 07 July 2023.
All research outputs
#901,326
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Current Rheumatology Reports
#24
of 762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,775
of 316,006 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Rheumatology Reports
#1
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 762 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 316,006 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 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 95% of its contemporaries.