↓ Skip to main content

Comorbid addictive behaviors in disordered gamblers with psychosis

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Comorbid addictive behaviors in disordered gamblers with psychosis
Published in
Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria, June 2018
DOI 10.1590/1516-4446-2017-2307
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hyoun S. Kim, Briana D. Cassetta, David C. Hodgins, Daniel S. McGrath, Lianne M. Tomfohr-Madsen, Hermano Tavares

Abstract

While it has been shown that disordered gamblers with psychosis are at increased risk for comorbid psychopathology, it is unclear whether this dual-diagnosis population is also at greater risk of problematic engagement with comorbid addictive behaviors. We tested for association between disordered gambling with psychosis and comorbid addictive behaviors in a sample of 349 treatment-seeking disordered gamblers. Twenty-five (7.2%) disordered gamblers met criteria for psychosis. Disordered gamblers with psychosis were no more likely to meet diagnostic criteria for current alcohol/substance use disorder than disordered gamblers without psychosis. However, this dual-disorder population reported greater misuse of shopping, food bingeing, caffeine, and prescription drugs. When controlling for multiple comparisons, binge eating was the only addictive behavior to remain significant. Given these findings, a comprehensive assessment of addictive behaviors - specifically food bingeing - in this population may be warranted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 14%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 18 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 15 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 19 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 16 July 2023.
All research outputs
#14,789,745
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria
#415
of 903 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,829
of 341,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 903 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 341,432 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.