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.
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.
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 |
Relationship between Glutamate Dysfunction and Symptoms and Cognitive Function in Psychosis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychiatry, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyt.2013.00151 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kate Merritt, Philip McGuire, Alice Egerton |
| Abstract |
The glutamate hypothesis of schizophrenia, proposed over two decades ago, originated following the observation that administration of drugs that block NMDA glutamate receptors, such as ketamine, could induce schizophrenia-like symptoms. Since then, this hypothesis has been extended to describe how glutamate abnormalities may disturb brain function and underpin psychotic symptoms and cognitive impairments. The glutamatergic system is now a major focus for the development of new compounds in schizophrenia. Relationships between regional brain glutamate function and symptom severity can be investigated using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) to estimate levels of glutamatergic metabolites in vivo. Here we briefly review the 1H-MRS studies that have explored relationships between glutamatergic metabolites, symptoms, and cognitive function in clinical samples. While some of these studies suggest that more severe symptoms may be associated with elevated glutamatergic function in the anterior cingulate, studies in larger patient samples selected on the basis of symptom severity are required. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 174 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
| Germany | 2 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 162 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 37 | 21% |
| Researcher | 26 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 24 | 14% |
| Unknown | 32 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 45 | 26% |
| Psychology | 30 | 17% |
| Neuroscience | 26 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 8% |
| Unknown | 34 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 19 December 2013.
All research outputs
#15,186,551
of 25,402,528 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#5,040
of 12,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,679
of 289,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#109
of 185 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,402,528 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,666 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 289,075 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 185 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.