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 |
The impact of transcranial magnetic stimulation on diagnostic confidence in patients with Alzheimer disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13195-018-0423-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alberto Benussi, Antonella Alberici, Clarissa Ferrari, Valentina Cantoni, Valentina Dell’Era, Rosanna Turrone, Maria Sofia Cotelli, Giuliano Binetti, Barbara Paghera, Giacomo Koch, Alessandro Padovani, Barbara Borroni |
| Abstract |
Cholinergic dysfunction is a key abnormality in Alzheimer disease (AD) that can be detected in vivo with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) protocols. Although TMS has clearly demonstrated analytical validity, its clinical utility is still debated. In the present study, we evaluated the incremental diagnostic value, expressed in terms of diagnostic confidence of Alzheimer disease (DCAD; range 0-100), of TMS measures in addition to the routine clinical diagnostic assessment in patients evaluated for cognitive impairment as compared with validated biomarkers of amyloidosis. One hundred twenty patients with dementia were included and scored in terms of DCAD in a three-step assessment based on (1) demographic, clinical, and neuropsychological evaluations (clinical work-up); (2) clinical work-up plus amyloid markers (cerebrospinal fluid or amyloid positron emission tomographic imaging); and (3) clinical work-up plus TMS intracortical connectivity measures. Two blinded neurologists were asked to review the diagnosis and diagnostic confidence at each step. TMS measures increased the discrimination of DCAD in two clusters (AD-like vs FTD-like) when added to the clinical and neuropsychological evaluations with levels comparable to established biomarkers of brain amyloidosis (cluster distance of 55.1 for clinical work-up alone, 76.0 for clinical work-up plus amyloid markers, 80.0 for clinical work-up plus TMS). Classification accuracy for the "gold standard" diagnosis (dichotomous - AD vs FTD - variable) evaluated in the three-step assessment, expressed as AUC, increased from 0.82 (clinical work-up alone) to 0.98 (clinical work-up plus TMS) and to 0.99 (clinical work-up plus amyloidosis markers). TMS in addition to routine assessment in patients with dementia has a significant effect on diagnosis and diagnostic confidence that is comparable to well-established amyloidosis biomarkers. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 90 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 16% |
| Researcher | 12 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Unknown | 36 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 18% |
| Neuroscience | 13 | 14% |
| Psychology | 8 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 41 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 07 October 2018.
All research outputs
#1,493,847
of 23,103,903 outputs
Outputs from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#235
of 1,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,005
of 341,703 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#11
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,903 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,252 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 341,703 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 90% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.