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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Executive functions as a potential neurocognitive endophenotype in anxiety disorders: A systematic review considering DSM-IV and DSM-5 diagnostic criteria classification
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Dementia & Neuropsychologia, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1590/1980-57642015dn93000012 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Juliana de Lima Muller, Kamilla Irigaray Torquato, Gisele Gus Manfro, Clarissa Marceli Trentini |
| Abstract |
Evidence in the literature indicates that neurocognitive impairments may represent endophenotypes in psychiatric disorders. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review on executive functions as a potential neurocognitive endophenotype in anxiety disorder diagnosis according to the DSM-IV and DSM-5 classifications. A literature search of the LILACS, Cochrane Library, Index Psi Periódicos Técnico-Científicos, PubMed and PsycInfo databases was conducted, with no time limits. Of the 259 studies found, 14 were included in this review. Only studies on obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) were found. The executive function components of decision-making, planning, response inhibition, behavioral reversal/alternation, reversal learning and set-shifting/cognitive flexibility were considered to be a neurocognitive endophenotypes in OCD. Further studies on executive functions as a neurocognitive endophenotype in other anxiety disorders are needed since these may have different neurocognitive endophenotypes and require other prevention and treatment approaches. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 15 | 79% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Energy | 1 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 15 | 79% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 April 2017.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Dementia & Neuropsychologia
#277
of 328 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,325
of 359,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dementia & Neuropsychologia
#13
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 328 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 359,528 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 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.