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 |
Structural neuroimaging of social cognition in progressive non-fluent aphasia and behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00467 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Blas Couto, Facundo Manes, Patricia Montañés, Diana Matallana, Pablo Reyes, Marcela Velasquez, Adrián Yoris, Sandra Baez, Agustin Ibáñez |
| Abstract |
Social cognition impairments are pervasive in the frontotemporal dementias (FTD). These deficits would be triggered by (a) basic emotion and face recognition processes as well as by (b) higher level social cognition (e.g., theory of mind, ToM). Both emotional processing and social cognition impairments have been previously reported in the behavioral variant of FTD (bvFTD) and also in other versions of FTDs, including primary progressive aphasia. However, no neuroanatomic comparison between different FTD variants has been performed. We report selective behavioral impairments of face recognition, emotion recognition, and ToM in patients with bvFTD and progressive non-fluent aphasia (PNFA) when compared to controls. Voxel-based morphometry (VBM) shows a classical impairment of mainly orbitofrontal (OFC), anterior cingulate (ACC), insula and lateral temporal cortices in patients. Comparative analysis of regional gray matter related to social cognition deficits (VBM) reveals a differential pattern of fronto-insulo-temporal atrophy in bvFTD and an insulo-temporal involvement in PNFA group. Results suggest that in spite of similar social cognition impairments reported in bvFTD and PNFA, the former represents an inherent ToM affectation whereas in the PNFA these deficits could be related to more basic processes of face and emotion recognition. These results are interpreted in the frame of the fronto-insulo-temporal social context network model (SCNM). |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 173 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Uruguay | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 172 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 30 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 17% |
| Researcher | 21 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 31 | 18% |
| Unknown | 34 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 50 | 29% |
| Neuroscience | 30 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 8% |
| Unknown | 40 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 20 August 2014.
All research outputs
#4,042,004
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#1,898
of 7,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,258
of 280,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#286
of 862 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,138 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 280,910 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 862 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 66% of its contemporaries.