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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
An alternative to current psychiatric classifications: a psychological landscape hypothesis based on an integrative, dynamical and multidimensional approach
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, July 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1747-5341-9-12 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thomas Lefèvre, Aude Lepresle, Patrick Chariot |
| Abstract |
Mental disorders as defined by current classifications are not fully supported by scientific evidence. It is unclear whether main disorders should be broken down into separate categories or disposed along a continuous spectrum. In the near future, new classes of mental disorders could be defined through associations of so-called abnormalities observed at the genetic, molecular and neuronal circuitry levels. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 50% |
| Ireland | 2 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 4 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 25% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 25 | 83% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 27% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 7% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 20% |
| Unknown | 5 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 9 | 30% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 13% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 10% |
| Philosophy | 2 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 6 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 November 2014.
All research outputs
#7,363,939
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#145
of 234 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,489
of 227,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 234 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 227,561 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.