↓ Skip to main content

Diagnosing rhythmic movement disorder with video-polysomnography

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Neurology, January 1997
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
Diagnosing rhythmic movement disorder with video-polysomnography
Published in
Pediatric Neurology, January 1997
DOI 10.1016/s0887-8994(96)00259-7
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

We evaluated the utility of accurate clinical and electrophysiologic characterization in the diagnosis of the rhythmic movement disorder. Seven children with an age range of 1-12 years, referred for evaluation of relatively violent nocturnal behaviors, were clinically assessed during split-screen, video-polysomnographic monitoring sessions, as they experienced unusual nocturnus movements. Differential diagnoses included self-injurious waking behaviors, seizures, and parasomnias such as somnambulism (sleepwalking), pavor nocturnus (night terrors), and the rhythmic movement disorder (headbanging, bodyrocking, and legbanging). The character of movements, level of responsiveness, and electrophysiologic stage of sleep was determined during typical spells. In all the subjects experienced 37 periods of headbanging, bodyrocking, and legbanging that were strongly associated with stage 2 non-rapid eye movement sleep and K-complexes. The patients were unresponsive during and amnestic for the events. Because the differential for the rhythmic movement disorder includes a large number of disorders associated with abnormal and at times violent nocturnal movements, diagnosis can be greatly enhanced by documenting suspected nocturnal behaviors with thorough clinical assessment during split-screen, video-polysomnographic analysis.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 43 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 14 32%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 16 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 December 2010.
All research outputs
#9,515,628
of 27,780,120 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Neurology
#797
of 2,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,471
of 99,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Neurology
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,780,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,951 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 99,631 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.