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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Co-Occurrence of Language and Behavioural Change in Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1159/000444848 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jennifer M. Harris, Matthew Jones, Claire Gall, Anna M.T. Richardson, David Neary, Daniel du Plessis, Piyali Pal, David M.A. Mann, Julie S. Snowden, Jennifer C. Thompson |
| Abstract |
We aimed to evaluate the co-occurrence of language and behavioural impairment in patients with frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) spectrum pathology. Eighty-one dementia patients with pathological confirmation of FTLD were identified. Anonymized clinical records from patients' first assessment were rated for language and behavioural features from frontotemporal dementia consensus criteria, primary progressive aphasia (PPA) criteria and 1998 FTLD criteria. Over 90% of patients with FTLD pathology exhibited a combination of at least one behavioural and one language feature. Changes in language, in particular, were commonly accompanied by behavioural change. Notably, the majority of patients who displayed language features characteristic of semantic variant PPA exhibited 'early perseverative, stereotyped or compulsive/ritualistic behaviour'. Moreover, 'executive/generation deficits with relative sparing of memory and visuospatial functions' occurred in most patients with core features of non-fluent variant PPA. Behavioural and language symptoms frequently co-occur in patients with FTLD pathology. Current classifications, which separate behavioural and language syndromes, do not reflect this co-occurrence. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 45 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 22% |
| Researcher | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 7 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 11 | 24% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 13 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 15 July 2016.
All research outputs
#4,191,823
of 22,880,691 outputs
Outputs from Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra
#95
of 277 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,617
of 339,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,691 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 277 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 339,120 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.