↓ Skip to main content

Olfactory asymmetric dysfunction in early Parkinson patients affected by unilateral disorder

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
Olfactory asymmetric dysfunction in early Parkinson patients affected by unilateral disorder
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01020
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gesualdo M. Zucco, Francesco Rovatti, Richard J. Stevenson

Abstract

Parkinson's disease (PD) often first presents with asymmetric motor symptoms. A number of studies have now established that sensory deficits can also be similarly asymmetric. It is well established that PD is associated with marked olfactory dysfunction, but whether this too present asymmetrically is a currently contentious question. To address this, we recruited 12 early stage Parkinson patients with right-sided motor symptoms and compared them to 12 healthy age-matched controls on tests of olfactory identification and recognition, administered separately to each nostril. Data analyses indicated that Parkinson patients performed worse with the left nostril on both tasks, while no nostril-related differences were observed for the healthy age-matched control group on the same comparisons. These findings support the idea that asymmetric deficits do extend into olfactory performance in PD-as they do into other sensory domains-and we examine the possibility that they might be a particular feature of right-sided motor symptom presentation.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Unknown 23 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 1 4%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 9 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 4 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 13%
Engineering 2 8%
Psychology 2 8%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 10 42%
Attention Score in Context

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 16 July 2015.
All research outputs
#18,418,919
of 22,817,213 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,138
of 29,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,875
of 262,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#477
of 559 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,817,213 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,760 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 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 262,414 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 559 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.