↓ Skip to main content

What boxing tells us about repetitive head trauma and the brain

Overview of attention for article published in Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
15 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 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
What boxing tells us about repetitive head trauma and the brain
Published in
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, June 2013
DOI 10.1186/alzrt177
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charles Bernick, Sarah Banks

Abstract

Boxing and other combat sports may serve as a human model to study the effects of repetitive head trauma on brain structure and function. The initial description of what is now known as chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) was reported in boxers in 1928. In the ensuing years, studies examining boxers have described the clinical features of CTE, its relationship to degree of exposure to fighting, and an array of radiologic findings. The field has been hampered by issues related to study design, lack of longitudinal follow-up, and absence of agreed-upon clinical criteria for CTE. A recently launched prospective cohort study of professional fighters, the Professional Fighters Brain Health Study, attempts to overcome some of the problems in studying fighters. Here, we review the cross-sectional results from the first year of the project.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 96 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 8%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 22 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 16%
Sports and Recreations 14 14%
Psychology 11 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 8%
Neuroscience 8 8%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 28 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 51. 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 13 September 2023.
All research outputs
#829,652
of 25,385,864 outputs
Outputs from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#101
of 1,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,189
of 206,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,864 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,456 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 206,726 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.