| Title |
Pharmacological treatment for memory disorder in multiple sclerosis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd008876.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dian He, Yun Zhang, Shuai Dong, Dongfeng Wang, Xiangdong Gao, Hongyu Zhou |
| Abstract |
This is an update of the Cochrane review "Pharmacologic treatment for memory disorder in multiple sclerosis" (first published in The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 10).Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic immune-mediated, inflammatory, demyelinating, neurodegenerative disorder of the central nervous system (CNS) and can cause both neurological and neuropsychological disability. Both demyelination and axonal and neuronal loss are believed to contribute to MS-related cognitive impairment. Memory disorder is one of the most frequent cognitive dysfunctions and presents a considerable burden to people with MS and to society due to the negative impact on function. A number of pharmacological agents have been evaluated in many existing randomised controlled trials for their efficacy on memory disorder in people with MS but the results were not consistent. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 227 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 221 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 39 | 17% |
| Researcher | 27 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 17 | 7% |
| Other | 38 | 17% |
| Unknown | 59 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 76 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 24 | 11% |
| Psychology | 19 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 13 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 18 | 8% |
| Unknown | 72 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 06 September 2021.
All research outputs
#1,594,450
of 22,736,112 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,649
of 12,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,998
of 286,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#79
of 227 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,736,112 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,315 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 286,036 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 227 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 65% of its contemporaries.