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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Improvement of autism spectrum disorder symptoms in three children by using gastrin-releasing peptide
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Jornal de Pediatria, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jped.2015.08.012 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michele Michelin Becker, Cleonice Bosa, Vera Lorentz Oliveira-Freitas, José Roberto Goldim, Lygia Ohlweiler, Rafael Roesler, Gilberto Schwartsmann, Rudimar dos Santos Riesgo |
| Abstract |
To evaluate the safety, tolerability and potential therapeutic effects of gastrin-releasing peptide in three children with autistic spectrum disorder. Case series study with the intravenous administration of gastrin-releasing peptide in the dose of 160pmol/kg for four consecutive days. To evaluate the results, parental impressions the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) and the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) Scale. Each child underwent a new peptide cycle after two weeks. The children were followed for four weeks after the end of the infusions. The gastrin-releasing peptide was well tolerated and no child had adverse effects. Two children had improved social interaction, with a slight improvement in joint attention and the interaction initiatives. Two showed reduction of stereotypes and improvement in verbal language. One child lost his compulsion to bathe, an effect that lasted two weeks after each infusion cycle. Average reduction in CARS score was 2.8 points. CGI was "minimally better" in two children and "much better" in one. This study suggests that the gastrin-releasing peptide is safe and may be effective in improving key symptoms of autism spectrum disorder, but its results should be interpreted with caution. Controlled clinical trials-randomized, double-blinded, and with more children-are needed to better evaluate the possible therapeutic effects of gastrin-releasing peptide in autism. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 77 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 16% |
| Researcher | 8 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 16% |
| Unknown | 17 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 16 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 8% |
| Arts and Humanities | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 20 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 14 July 2016.
All research outputs
#3,321,565
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Jornal de Pediatria
#67
of 901 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,733
of 414,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Jornal de Pediatria
#2
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 901 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 414,138 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 86% 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.