↓ Skip to main content

Neural Correlates of the Severity of Cocaine, Heroin, Alcohol, MDMA and Cannabis Use in Polysubstance Abusers: A Resting-PET Brain Metabolism Study

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, June 2012
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
137 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
Neural Correlates of the Severity of Cocaine, Heroin, Alcohol, MDMA and Cannabis Use in Polysubstance Abusers: A Resting-PET Brain Metabolism Study
Published in
PLOS ONE, June 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0039830
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura Moreno-López, Emmanuel A. Stamatakis, Maria José Fernández-Serrano, Manuel Gómez-Río, Antonio Rodríguez-Fernández, Miguel Pérez-García, Antonio Verdejo-García

Abstract

Functional imaging studies of addiction following protracted abstinence have not been systematically conducted to look at the associations between severity of use of different drugs and brain dysfunction. Findings from such studies may be relevant to implement specific interventions for treatment. The aim of this study was to examine the association between resting-state regional brain metabolism (measured with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography (FDG-PET) and the severity of use of cocaine, heroin, alcohol, MDMA and cannabis in a sample of polysubstance users with prolonged abstinence from all drugs used.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 132 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 15%
Student > Master 18 13%
Student > Bachelor 16 12%
Other 10 7%
Other 31 23%
Unknown 19 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 38 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 15%
Neuroscience 16 12%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 4%
Other 21 15%
Unknown 27 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 13 October 2018.
All research outputs
#1,962,348
of 23,538,320 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#24,975
of 201,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,325
of 165,370 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#410
of 3,992 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,538,320 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 201,786 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 165,370 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,992 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.