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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Comparison of cognitive functioning as measured by the Ruff Figural Fluency Test and the CogState computerized battery within the LifeLines Cohort Study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Psychology, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40359-017-0185-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jisca S. Kuiper, Richard C. Oude Voshaar, Floor E. A. Verhoeven, Sytse U. Zuidema, Nynke Smidt |
| Abstract |
The Ruff Figural Fluency Test (RFFT; a pencil and paper test) and the CogState (a computerized cognitive test battery) are well-validated and suitable tests to evaluate cognitive functioning in large observational studies at the population level. The LifeLines Cohort Study includes the RFFT as baseline measurement and incorporated the CogState as replacement for the RFFT at follow-up. It is unknown how these two tests relate to each other. Therefore, the aim of this study is to examine the correlation between the RFFT and the CogState and the impact of demographic characteristics on this association. A subcohort of the LifeLines Cohort Study, a large population based cohort study, participated in this study. Correlations between the RFFT and six subtasks of the CogState were examined. Subgroup analyses were performed to investigate the influence of age, education, and gender on the results. With sensitivity analyses we investigated the influence of computer experience and (physical) impairments. A total of 509 participants (mean age (SD): 53 years (14.6); range 18-87 years) participated in this study. All correlations between the RFFT and the CogState were statistically significant (except for the correlation between the RFFT error ratio and the CogState One Back Task), ranging from -0.39 to 0.28. Stratifying the analyses for age, education, and gender did not substantially affect our conclusions. Sensitivity analyses showed no substantial influence of level of computer experience or (physical) impairments. Correlations found in the present study were only weak to moderate, indicating that cognitive functioning measured by the RFFT does not measure the same components of cognitive functioning as six subtasks of the CogState. Computerized testing such as the CogState may be very well suited for large cohort studies to assess cognitive functioning in the general population and to identify cognitive changes as early as possible, as it is a less time- and labor intensive tool. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 17 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 16 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 13% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 18 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 01 February 2018.
All research outputs
#8,351,161
of 25,605,018 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychology
#607
of 1,129 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,145
of 325,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychology
#10
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,605,018 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,129 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.0. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 325,214 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.