↓ Skip to main content

Social (pragmatic) communication disorder: a research review of this new DSM-5 diagnostic category

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#30 of 455)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
26 tweeters
facebook
6 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
89 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
261 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
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
Social (pragmatic) communication disorder: a research review of this new DSM-5 diagnostic category
Published in
Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/1866-1955-6-41
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lauren B Swineford, Audrey Thurm, Gillian Baird, Amy M Wetherby, Susan Swedo

Abstract

Social (pragmatic) communication disorder (SCD) is a new diagnostic category in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5). The purpose of this review is to describe and synthesize the relevant literature from language and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) research relating to pragmatic language impairment and other previously used terms that relate to SCD. The long-standing debate regarding how social communication/pragmatic impairments overlap and/or differ from language impairments, ASD, and other neurodevelopmental disorders is examined. The possible impact of the addition of SCD diagnostic category and directions for future research are also discussed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 261 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Unknown 259 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 51 20%
Student > Bachelor 36 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 11%
Researcher 20 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 7%
Other 56 21%
Unknown 51 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 80 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 11%
Social Sciences 23 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 8%
Linguistics 18 7%
Other 29 11%
Unknown 62 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 30 May 2022.
All research outputs
#927,326
of 21,446,675 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders
#30
of 455 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,395
of 346,581 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders
#3
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,446,675 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 455 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. 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 346,581 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 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 92% of its contemporaries.