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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Factors Explaining Language Performance After Training in Elders With and Without Subjective Cognitive Decline
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnagi.2018.00264 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ramón López-Higes, Jose M. Prados, Susana Rubio-Valdehita, Inmaculada Rodríguez-Rojo, Jaisalmer de Frutos-Lucas, Mercedes Montenegro, Pedro Montejo, David Prada, María L. D. Losada |
| Abstract |
The present study explores if cognitive reserve, executive functions, and working memory capacity are predictive of performance in the language domain (specifically in sentence comprehension and naming) after a cognitive training intervention. Sixty-six Spanish older adults voluntarily participated in the study, classified either as older adults with subjective cognitive decline according to Jessen et al.'s (2014) criteria (n = 35; 70.94 ± 4.16 years old) or cognitively intact (n = 31; 71.34 ± 4.96 years old). Written sentence comprehension and visual confrontation naming were assessed both immediately after recruitment (at the baseline), and then 6 months later, once each participant had completed his/her cognitive training (a well-known program in Spain, called UMAM; English translation: Madrid City Council Memory Unit Program). Cognitive reserve, executive functions (cognitive flexibility and controlled interference efficiency), and working memory capacity were measured for all participants at the baseline. Results pointed out that the subjective cognitive decline group presented greater benefits in the language domain than cognitively intact participants. We also observed that lower executive functioning and working memory capacity at the baseline predicted larger benefits in language performance after training, but only in the group of cognitively intact older adults. However, selected predictors hardly explained subjective cognitive decline participants' results in language performance after training. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 65 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 17% |
| Unknown | 23 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 17 | 26% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 27 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 02 February 2019.
All research outputs
#3,356,527
of 23,342,092 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#1,965
of 4,927 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,335
of 336,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#55
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,342,092 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,927 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 336,291 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.