↓ Skip to main content

New guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of insomnia

Overview of attention for article published in Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria, August 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 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
New guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of insomnia
Published in
Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria, August 2010
DOI 10.1590/s0004-282x2010000400038
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luciano Ribeiro Pinto, Rosana Cardoso Alves, Eliazor Caixeta, John Araujo Fontenelle, Andrea Bacellar, Dalva Poyares, Flavio Aloe, Geraldo Rizzo, Gisele Minhoto, Lia Rita Bittencourt, Luiz Ataide, Márcia Assis, Márcia Pradella-Hallinan, Maria Christina Ribeiro Pinto, Raimundo Nonato D Rodrigues, Rosa Hasan, Ronaldo Fonseca, Stella Tavares

Abstract

The Brazilian Sleep Association brought together specialists in sleep medicine, in order to develop new guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of insomnias. The following subjects were discussed: concepts, clinical and psychosocial evaluations, recommendations for polysomnography, pharmacological treatment, behavioral and cognitive therapy, comorbidities and insomnia in children. Four levels of evidence were envisaged: standard, recommended, optional and not recommended. For diagnosing of insomnia, psychosocial and polysomnographic investigation were recommended. For non-pharmacological treatment, cognitive behavioral treatment was considered to be standard, while for pharmacological treatment, zolpidem was indicated as the standard drug because of its hypnotic profile, while zopiclone, trazodone and doxepin were recommended.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 2%
Italy 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 135 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 12%
Researcher 16 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 9%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Other 36 25%
Unknown 35 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 58 41%
Psychology 11 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Neuroscience 6 4%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 41 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 23 March 2012.
All research outputs
#2,966,211
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria
#64
of 1,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,617
of 104,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,369 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 104,281 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.