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 |
Neuropsychological functioning in late-life depression
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00381 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gro Strømnes Dybedal, Lars Tanum, Kjetil Sundet, Torfinn Lødøen Gaarden, Tor Magne Bjølseth |
| Abstract |
Background: The literature describing neurocognitive function in patients with late-life depression (LLD) show inconsistent findings in regard to incidence and main deficits. Reduced information processing speed is in some studies found to explain deficits in higher order cognitive function, while other studies report specific deficits in memory and executive function. Our aim was to determine the characteristics of neuropsychological functioning in non-demented LLD patients. Methods: A comprehensive neuropsychological battery was administered to a group of hospitalized LLD patients and healthy control (HC) subjects. Thirty-nine patients without dementia, 60 years or older meeting DSM-IV criteria for current episode of major depression, and 18 non-depressed control subjects were included. The patient group was characterized by having a long lasting current depressive episode of late-onset depression and by being non-responders to treatment with antidepressants. Neurocognitive scores were calculated for the domains of information processing speed, verbal memory, visuospatial memory, executive function, and language. Number of impairments (performance below the 10th percentile of the control group per domain) for each participant was calculated. Results: Nearly half of the patients had a clinically significant cognitive impairment in at least one neurocognitive domain. Relative to HC subjects, LLD patients performed significantly poorer in the domains of information processing speed and executive function. Executive abilities were most frequently impaired in the patient group (39% of the patients). Even when controlling for differences in processing speed, patients showed more executive deficits than controls. Conclusions: Controlling for processing speed, patients still showed impaired executive function compared to HCs. Reduced executive function thus appears to be the core neurocognitive deficit in LLD. Executive function seems to be an umbrella concept for several connected but distinct cognitive functions. Further studies of neuropsychological functioning in LLD patients are needed to characterize more specific what kinds of executive impairments patients have. Additional studies of remitted LLD patients are needed to separate episode-related and persistent impairments. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 96 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 12% |
| Researcher | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 11% |
| Other | 12 | 12% |
| Unknown | 21 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 43 | 44% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 8% |
| Unknown | 28 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 June 2013.
All research outputs
#20,195,877
of 22,713,403 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#23,852
of 29,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,765
of 280,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#851
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,713,403 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,506 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 280,743 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 969 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.