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 |
Basal Forebrain Volume, but Not Hippocampal Volume, Is a Predictor of Global Cognitive Decline in Patients With Alzheimer's Disease Treated With Cholinesterase Inhibitors
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neurology, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fneur.2018.00642 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stefan J. Teipel, Enrica Cavedo, Harald Hampel, Michel J. Grothe, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative, Alzheimer Precision Medicine Initiative, Lisi Flores Aguilar, Claudio Babiloni, Filippo Baldacci, Norbert Benda, Keith L. Black, Arun L. W. Bokde, Ubaldo Bonuccelli, Karl Broich, René S. Bun, Francesco Cacciola, Juan Castrillo, Enrica Cavedo, Roberto Ceravolo, Patrizia A. chiesa, Olivier Colliot, Cristina-Maria Coman, Jean-Christophe Corvol, Augusto Claudio Cuello, Jeffrey L. Cummings, Herman Depypere, Bruno Dubois, Andrea Duggento, Stanley Durrleman, Valentina Escott-price, Howard Federoff, Maria Teresa Ferretti, Massimo Fiandaca, Richard A. Frank, Francesco Garaci, Remy Genthon, Nathalie George, Filippo S. Giorgi, Manuela Graziani, Marion Haberkamp, Marie-Odile Habert, Harald Hampel, Karl Herholz, Eric Karran, H. KIM Seung, Yosef Koronyo, Maya Koronyo-Hamaoui, Foudil Lamari, Todd Langevin, Stéphane Lehéricy, Simone Lista, Jean Lorenceau, Mark Mapstone, Christian Neri, Robert Nisticò, Francis Nyasse-Messene, Sid E. O'Bryant, George Perry, Craig Ritchie, Katrine Rojkova, Simone Rossi, Amira Saidi, Emiliano Santarnecchi, Lon S. Schneider, Olaf Sporns, Nicola Toschi, Steven R. Verdooner, Andrea Vergallo, Nicolas Villain, Lindsay A. Welikovitch, Janet Woodcock, Erfan Younesi |
| Abstract |
Background: Predicting the progression of cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease (AD) is important for treatment selection and patient counseling. Structural MRI markers such as hippocampus or basal forebrain volumes might represent useful instruments for the prediction of cognitive decline. The primary objective was to determine the predictive value of hippocampus and basal forebrain volumes for global and domain specific cognitive decline in AD dementia during cholinergic treatment. Methods: We used MRI and cognitive data from 124 patients with the clinical diagnosis of AD dementia, derived from the ADNI-1 cohort, who were on standard of care cholinesterase inhibitor treatment during a follow-up period between 0.4 and 3.1 years. We used linear mixed effects models with cognitive function as outcome to assess the main effects as well as two-way interactions between baseline volumes and time controlling for age, sex, and total intracranial volume. This model accounts for individual variation in follow-up times. Results: Basal forebrain volume, but not hippocampus volume, was a significant predictor of rates of global cognitive decline. Larger volumes were associated with smaller rates of cognitive decline. Left hippocampus volume had a modest association with rates of episodic memory decline. Baseline performance in global cognition and memory was significantly associated with hippocampus and basal forebrain volumes; in addition, basal forebrain volume was associated with baseline performance in executive function. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that in AD dementia patients, basal forebrain volume may be a useful marker to predict subsequent cognitive decline during cholinergic treatment. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 66 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 21% |
| Researcher | 12 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 15% |
| Unknown | 18 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 14 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 14% |
| Psychology | 5 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 17% |
| Unknown | 21 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 10 May 2022.
All research outputs
#14,138,420
of 23,099,576 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#5,542
of 12,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,543
of 331,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#128
of 298 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,099,576 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,015 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 331,095 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 298 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.