↓ Skip to main content

Social (pragmatic) communication disorder: a research review of this new DSM-5 diagnostic category

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#28 of 333)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
26 tweeters
facebook
6 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
187 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
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
Social (pragmatic) communication disorder: a research review of this new DSM-5 diagnostic category
Published in
Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/1866-1955-6-41
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lauren B Swineford, Audrey Thurm, Gillian Baird, Amy M Wetherby, Susan Swedo

Abstract

Social (pragmatic) communication disorder (SCD) is a new diagnostic category in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5). The purpose of this review is to describe and synthesize the relevant literature from language and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) research relating to pragmatic language impairment and other previously used terms that relate to SCD. The long-standing debate regarding how social communication/pragmatic impairments overlap and/or differ from language impairments, ASD, and other neurodevelopmental disorders is examined. The possible impact of the addition of SCD diagnostic category and directions for future research are also discussed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 187 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Unknown 185 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 23%
Student > Bachelor 25 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 12%
Student > Postgraduate 17 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 9%
Other 43 23%
Unknown 20 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 63 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 14%
Social Sciences 17 9%
Linguistics 16 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 9%
Other 20 11%
Unknown 28 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 30 September 2018.
All research outputs
#795,186
of 15,924,754 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders
#28
of 333 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,972
of 308,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders
#2
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,924,754 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 333 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 308,227 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.