↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Readers on

mendeley
462 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
Impaired eye movements in post-concussion syndrome indicate suboptimal brain function beyond the influence of depression, malingering or intellectual ability
Published in
Brain, July 2009
DOI 10.1093/brain/awp181
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Post-concussion syndrome (PCS) can affect up to 20%-30% of patients with mild closed head injury (mCHI), comprising incomplete recovery and debilitating persistence of post-concussional symptoms. Eye movements relate closely to the functional integrity of the injured brain and eye movement function is impaired post-acutely in mCHI. Here, we examined whether PCS patients continue to show disparities in eye movement function at 3-5 months following mCHI compared with patients with good recovery. We hypothesized that eye movements might provide sensitive and objective functional markers of ongoing cerebral impairment in PCS. We compared 36 PCS participants (adapted World Health Organization guidelines) and 36 individually matched controls (i.e. mCHI patients of similar injury severity but good recovery) on reflexive, anti- and self-paced saccades, memory-guided sequences and smooth pursuit. All completed neuropsychological testing and health status questionnaires. Mean time post-injury was 140 days in the PCS group and 163 days in the control group. The PCS group performed worse on anti-saccades, self-paced saccades, memory-guided sequences and smooth pursuit, suggesting problems in response inhibition, short-term spatial memory, motor-sequence programming, visuospatial processing and visual attention. This poorer oculomotor performance included several measures beyond conscious control, indicating that subcortical functionality in the PCS group was poorer than expected after mCHI. The PCS group had poorer neuropsychological function (memory, complex attention and executive function). Analysis of covariance showed oculomotor differences to be practically unaffected by group disparities in depression and estimated intellectual ability. Compared with neuropsychological tests, eye movements were more likely to be markedly impaired in PCS cases with high symptom load. Poorer eye movement function, and particularly poorer subcortical oculomotor function, correlated more with post-concussive symptom load and problems on activities of daily living whilst poorer neuropsychological function exhibited slightly better correlations with measures of mental health. Our findings that eye movement function in PCS does not follow the normal recovery path of eye movements after mCHI are indicative of ongoing cerebral impairment. Whilst oculomotor and neuropsychological tests partially overlapped in identifying impairment, eye movements showed additional dysfunction in motor/visuospatial areas, response inhibition, visual attention and subcortical function. Poorer subconscious oculomotor function in the PCS group supports the notion that PCS is not merely a psychological entity, but also has a biological substrate. Measurement of oculomotor function may be of value in PCS cases with a high symptom load but an otherwise unremarkable assessment profile. Routine oculomotor testing should be feasible in centres with existing access to this technology.

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.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 462 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 9 2%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 444 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 72 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 63 14%
Student > Master 50 11%
Student > Bachelor 44 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 32 7%
Other 105 23%
Unknown 96 21%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 113 24%
Psychology 66 14%
Neuroscience 47 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 6%
Engineering 25 5%
Other 67 15%
Unknown 118 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 30 June 2026.
All research outputs
#1,673,842
of 33,493,714 outputs
Outputs from Brain
#1,602
of 8,988 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,946
of 166,784 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain
#4
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,493,714 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,988 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 166,784 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 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 91% of its contemporaries.