↓ Skip to main content

Olfactory Impairment Is Correlated with Confabulation in Alcoholism: Towards a Multimodal Testing of Orbitofrontal Cortex

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, August 2011
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 (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 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
Olfactory Impairment Is Correlated with Confabulation in Alcoholism: Towards a Multimodal Testing of Orbitofrontal Cortex
Published in
PLOS ONE, August 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0023190
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pierre Maurage, Christophe Callot, Betty Chang, Pierre Philippot, Philippe Rombaux, Philippe de Timary

Abstract

Olfactory abilities are now a flourishing field in psychiatry research. As the orbitofrontal cortex appears to be simultaneously implicated in odour processing and executive impairments, it has been proposed that olfaction could constitute a cognitive marker of psychiatric states. While this assumption appears promising, very few studies have been conducted on this topic among psychopathological populations. The present study thus aimed at exploring the links between olfaction and executive functions. These links were evaluated using two tasks of comparable difficulty, one known to rely on orbitofrontal cortex processing (i.e., a confabulation task), and one not associated with this area (i.e., Stop-Signal task).

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 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 68 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 21%
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Master 6 8%
Professor 6 8%
Other 16 23%
Unknown 12 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 33 46%
Neuroscience 5 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 17 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 21 August 2011.
All research outputs
#3,594,898
of 22,649,029 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#44,505
of 193,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,181
of 120,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#473
of 2,356 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,649,029 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,361 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 120,747 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,356 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.