↓ Skip to main content

Errors on the MoCA's animal-naming: findings from Parkinson's disease patients

Overview of attention for article published in International Psychogeriatrics, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Errors on the MoCA's animal-naming: findings from Parkinson's disease patients
Published in
International Psychogeriatrics, March 2017
DOI 10.1017/s1041610217000345
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

We read the findings by Cecato et al. (2016) with great interest. In their study, naming the rhinoceros discriminated between patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) but not healthy controls (HC). Of note, HC participants were significantly younger than aMCI and AD patients. All participants were administered the original version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) instrument.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 14%
Student > Master 2 14%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Unknown 9 64%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 2 14%
Neuroscience 2 14%
Psychology 1 7%
Unknown 9 64%
Attention Score in Context

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 10 March 2017.
All research outputs
#4,209,783
of 22,958,253 outputs
Outputs from International Psychogeriatrics
#415
of 1,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,712
of 308,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Psychogeriatrics
#13
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,958,253 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 1,964 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. 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 308,016 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 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 56% of its contemporaries.