↓ Skip to main content

Differentiation of neuropsychological features between posterior cortical atrophy and early onset Alzheimer’s disease

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
Differentiation of neuropsychological features between posterior cortical atrophy and early onset Alzheimer’s disease
Published in
BMC Neurology, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12883-018-1068-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jieying Li, Liyong Wu, Yi Tang, Aihong Zhou, Fen Wang, Yi Xing, Jianping Jia

Abstract

Posterior cortical atrophy (PCA) is a group of clinical syndromes characterized by visuospatial and visuoperceptual impairment, with memory relatively preserved. Although PCA is pathologically almost identical to Alzheimer's disease (AD), they have different cognitive features. Those differences have only rarely been reported in any Chinese population. The purpose of the study is to establish neuropsychological tests that distinguish the clinical features of PCA from early onset AD (EOAD). Twenty-one PCA patients, 20 EOAD patients, and 20 healthy controls participated in this study. Patients had disease duration of ≤4 years. All participants completed a series of neuropsychological tests to evaluate their visuospatial, visuoperceptual, visuo-constructive, language, executive function, memory, calculation, writing, and reading abilities. The cognitive features of PCA and EOAD were compared. All the neuropsychological test scores showed that both the PCA and EOAD patients were significantly more impaired than people in the control group. However, PCA patients were significantly more impaired than EOAD patients in visuospatial, visuoperceptual, and visuo-constructive function, as well as in handwriting, and reading Chinese characters. The profile of neuropsychological test results highlights cognitive features that differ between PCA and EOAD. One surprising result is that the two syndromes could be distinguished by patients' ability to read and write Chinese characters. Tests based on these characteristics could therefore form a brief PCA neuropsychological examination that would improve the diagnosis of PCA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 14%
Other 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 20 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 25%
Neuroscience 8 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Linguistics 3 4%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 22 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 18 May 2018.
All research outputs
#2,980,805
of 23,054,359 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#349
of 2,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,795
of 326,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#2
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,054,359 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,468 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 326,014 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 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 94% of its contemporaries.