↓ Skip to main content

Are poor set-shifting abilities associated with a higher frequency of body checking in anorexia nervosa?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Eating Disorders, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

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
Are poor set-shifting abilities associated with a higher frequency of body checking in anorexia nervosa?
Published in
Journal of Eating Disorders, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40337-015-0053-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria Øverås, Hilde Kapstad, Cathrine Brunborg, Nils Inge Landrø, Bryan Lask

Abstract

The rigid and obsessional features of anorexia nervosa (AN) have led researchers to explore possible underlying neuropsychological difficulties. Numerous studies have demonstrated poorer set-shifting in patients with AN. However, due to a paucity of research on the connection between neuropsychological difficulties and the clinical features of AN, the link remains hypothetical. The main objective of this study was to explore the association between set-shifting and body checking. The sample consisted of 30 females diagnosed with AN and 45 healthy females. Set-shifting was assessed using the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) and frequency of body checking was assessed using the Body Checking Questionnaire (BCQ). The analysis showed no significant correlations between any of the WCST scores and the BCQ. The results suggest that there is no association between set-shifting difficulties and frequency of body checking among patients with AN. An alternative explanation could be that the neuropsychological measure included in this study is not sensitive to the set-shifting difficulties observed in clinical settings. We recommend that future studies include more ecologically valid measures of set-shifting in addition to standard neuropsychological tests.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 3%
Unknown 28 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 24%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 21%
Student > Master 3 10%
Other 2 7%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 7%
Other 6 21%
Unknown 3 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 13 45%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 6 21%
Attention Score in Context

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 15 May 2015.
All research outputs
#7,579,726
of 23,965,413 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Eating Disorders
#536
of 863 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,654
of 267,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Eating Disorders
#16
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,965,413 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 863 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.7. 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 267,411 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.