↓ Skip to main content

Recovery of neurocognitive functions following sustained abstinence after substance dependence and implications for treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Psychology Review, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 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
Recovery of neurocognitive functions following sustained abstinence after substance dependence and implications for treatment
Published in
Clinical Psychology Review, November 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.cpr.2014.08.002
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mieke H.J. Schulte, Janna Cousijn, Tess E. den Uyl, Anna E. Goudriaan, Wim van den Brink, Dick J. Veltman, Thelma Schilt, Reinout W. Wiers

Abstract

Substance Use Disorders (SUDs) have been associated with impaired neurocognitive functioning, which may (partly) improve with sustained abstinence. New treatments are emerging, aimed at improving cognitive functions, and being tested. However, no integrated review is available regarding neurocognitive recovery following sustained abstinence.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Germany 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 103 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 19%
Student > Bachelor 17 16%
Researcher 16 15%
Student > Master 16 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 31 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 54 50%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 17%
Unspecified 12 11%
Neuroscience 10 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Other 9 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 August 2014.
All research outputs
#7,143,695
of 12,016,324 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Psychology Review
#899
of 1,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,033
of 201,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Psychology Review
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,016,324 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,024 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.3. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 201,388 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.