↓ Skip to main content

Executive functions and insight in OCD: a comparative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, April 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Executive functions and insight in OCD: a comparative study
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, April 2021
DOI 10.1186/s12888-021-03227-w
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lucas Manarte, António R. Andrade, Linete do Rosário, Daniel Sampaio, Maria Luísa Figueira, Pedro Morgado, Barbara J. Sahakian

Abstract

Around 25 to 30% of patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) do not respond to treatment. These patients have the longest duration of disease and the worst prognosis. Following years of research on this topic, insight has emerged as a potential explanation for this therapeutic resistance. Therefore, it has become important to characterize OCD patients with poor insight. Few studies have focused on the neuropsychological and cognitive characteristics of these patients. To help fill this gap, we divided 57 patients into two groups, one with good insight and the other with poor insight, assessed their neuropsychological functions-through a Rey's figure test, a California verbal learning test, a Toulouse-Piéron test and a Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)-and compared the results with those of a paired control group. The statistical analysis, with a significance level of 95%, revealed differences in the executive function tests, and particularly in the WCST (p ≤ 0.001) and trail-making-test (TMT A/B) (p = 0.002). These differences suggest that the neuropsychological profile of poor-insight patients is different from their good-insight counterparts, emphasize the role played by the executive functions in insight and highlights the need for more accurate neurocognitive research and treatment.

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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 17%
Other 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 13 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 17%
Neuroscience 3 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 12 41%
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 03 May 2021.
All research outputs
#15,685,238
of 23,308,124 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#3,495
of 4,810 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#260,245
of 437,488 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#78
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,308,124 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 4,810 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 437,488 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.