↓ Skip to main content

Foundations for a realist ontology of mental disease

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Biomedical Semantics, December 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
135 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
Foundations for a realist ontology of mental disease
Published in
Journal of Biomedical Semantics, December 2010
DOI 10.1186/2041-1480-1-10
Pubmed ID
Authors

Werner Ceusters, Barry Smith

Abstract

While classifications of mental disorders have existed for over one hundred years, it still remains unspecified what terms such as 'mental disorder', 'disease' and 'illness' might actually denote. While ontologies have been called in aid to address this shortfall since the GALEN project of the early 1990s, most attempts thus far have sought to provide a formal description of the structure of some pre-existing terminology or classification, rather than of the corresponding structures and processes on the side of the patient.We here present a view of mental disease that is based on ontological realism and which follows the principles embodied in Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) and in the application of BFO in the Ontology of General Medical Science (OGMS). We analyzed statements about what counts as a mental disease provided (1) in the research agenda for the DSM-V, and (2) in Pies' model. The results were used to assess whether the representational units of BFO and OGMS were adequate as foundations for a formal representation of the entities in reality that these statements attempt to describe. We then analyzed the representational units specific to mental disease and provided corresponding definitions.Our key contributions lie in the identification of confusions and conflations in the existing terminology of mental disease and in providing what we believe is a framework for the sort of clear and unambiguous reference to entities on the side of the patient that is needed in order to avoid these confusions in the future.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
United Kingdom 3 2%
Portugal 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 124 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 21%
Researcher 27 20%
Student > Master 21 16%
Other 11 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 5%
Other 24 18%
Unknown 16 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 30 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 14%
Psychology 18 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 9%
Philosophy 7 5%
Other 30 22%
Unknown 19 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 19 February 2020.
All research outputs
#6,754,036
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Biomedical Semantics
#96
of 368 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,577
of 191,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Biomedical Semantics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 368 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 191,021 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them