↓ Skip to main content

Friedrich Nietzsche: the wandering and learned neuropath under Dionisius

Overview of attention for article published in Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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.
Title
Friedrich Nietzsche: the wandering and learned neuropath under Dionisius
Published in
Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria, November 2015
DOI 10.1590/0004-282x20150125
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marleide da Mota Gomes

Abstract

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) was a remarkable philologist-philosopher while remaining in a condition of ill-health. Issues about his wandering/disruptive behavior that might be a consequence and/or protection against his cognitive decline and multifaceted disease are presented. The life complex that raises speculations about its etiology is constituted by: insight, creativity and wandering behavior besides several symptoms and signs of disease(s), mainly neurological one. The most important issue to be considered at the moment is not the disease diagnosis (Lissauer's general paresis or CADASIL, e.g.), but the probable Nietzsche's great cognitive reserve linked to the multifactorial etiology (genetic and environmental), and shared characteristics both to creativity and psychopathology. This makes any disease seems especial regarding Nietzsche, and whichever the diagnostic hypothesis has to consider the Nietzsche's unique background to express any disease(s).

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 14%
Other 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 10 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 4 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 11%
Neuroscience 3 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 11 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 24 August 2022.
All research outputs
#6,400,781
of 23,164,913 outputs
Outputs from Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria
#257
of 1,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,988
of 285,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria
#8
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,164,913 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,263 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 285,289 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 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 55% of its contemporaries.