↓ Skip to main content

Traumatic Brain Injury and Olfaction: A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, January 2014
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 (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
98 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 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
Traumatic Brain Injury and Olfaction: A Systematic Review
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2014.00005
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter William Schofield, Tammie Maree Moore, Andrew Gardner

Abstract

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a common condition that is often complicated by neuropsychiatric sequelae that can have major impacts on function and quality of life. An alteration in the sense of smell is recognized as a relatively common complication of TBI; however in clinical practice, this complication may not be sought or adequately characterized. We conducted a systematic review of studies concerned with olfactory functioning following TBI. Our predetermined criteria led to the identification of 25 studies published in English, which we examined in detail. We have tabulated the data from these studies in eight separate tables, beginning with Table 1, which highlights each study's key findings, and we provide a summary/synthesis of the findings in the accompanying results and discussion sections. Despite widely differing methodologies, the studies attest to a high frequency of post-TBI olfactory dysfunction and indicate that its presence can serve as a potential marker of additional structural or functional morbidities.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 102 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 17%
Researcher 12 12%
Student > Master 12 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 6%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 32 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 18%
Psychology 16 16%
Neuroscience 11 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 37 36%
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 03 October 2020.
All research outputs
#3,747,094
of 26,470,638 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#2,630
of 15,141 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,684
of 322,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#2
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,470,638 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,141 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 322,459 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 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.