↓ Skip to main content

A Possible Common Neurophysiologic Basis for MDD, Bipolar Disorder, and Schizophrenia: Lessons from Electrophysiology

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
A Possible Common Neurophysiologic Basis for MDD, Bipolar Disorder, and Schizophrenia: Lessons from Electrophysiology
Published in
Frontiers in Psychiatry, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00094
Pubmed ID
Authors

Goded Shahaf

Abstract

There is ample electrophysiological evidence of attention dysfunction in the EEG/ERP signal of major depressive disorder (MDD), bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia. The reduced attention-related ERP waves show much similarity between MDD, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia, raising the question whether there are similarities in the neurophysiologic process that underlies attention dysfunction in these pathologies. The present work suggests that there is such a unified underlying neurophysiologic process, which results in reduced attention in the three pathologies. Naturally, as these pathologies involve different clinical manifestations, we expect differences in their underlying neurophysiology. These differences and their subtle manifestation in the ERP marker for attention are also discussed. MDD, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia are just three of multiple neuropsychiatric disorders, which involve changes in the EEG/ERP manifestations of attention. Further work should expand the basic model presented here to offer comprehensive modeling of these multiple disorders and to emphasize similarities and dissimilarities of the underlying neurophysiologic processes.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 19%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Researcher 4 9%
Other 3 7%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 8 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 10 23%
Psychology 8 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 11 26%
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 18 June 2016.
All research outputs
#15,376,252
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#5,791
of 10,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,610
of 339,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#49
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,036 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 339,120 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.