↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

A biopsychological review of gambling disorder

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
Title
A biopsychological review of gambling disorder
Published in
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, December 2016
DOI 10.2147/ndt.s118818
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gabriel Quintero

Abstract

The present review is an overview of previous experimental work on biopsychological aspects of gambling disorder. It includes the topics 1) gambling disorder from the neuroimaging and electroencephalography (EEG) perspective, 2) cognitive, executive functioning, and neuropsychological aspects of gambling disorder, and 3) rodent models of gambling disorder. Penalties and losses in gambling can differ in terms of brain activity. Also, specific patterns of brain activity, brain anatomical traits, EEG responses, and cognitive and executive performance can discriminate pathological gamblers from nonpathological gamblers. Also, pathological gamblers can display dysfunction in such brain areas as the insula, frontal lobe, and orbitofrontal cortex. Pathological gambling is a heterogeneous disorder that can vary depending on the severity of cognition, the style of gambling (strategic or not), the prospect of recovery, proneness to relapse, and proneness to treatment withdrawal. Finally, based on rodent models of gambling, the appropriateness of gambling decision is influenced by the presence of cues, the activity of dopamine receptors, and the activity of some brain areas (infralimbic, prelimbic, or rostral agranular insular cortex). Pathological gamblers differed in terms of frontoparietal brain activation compared to nonpathological gamblers (if winning or losing a game). Pathological gamblers had dysfunctional EEG activity. The severity of gambling was linked to the magnification and content of cognitive distortions. The insula was fundamental in the distortion of cognitions linked to result analysis during gambling activity.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 58 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 13%
Student > Master 6 10%
Other 5 8%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 16 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 8%
Neuroscience 5 8%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 21 35%

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 30 December 2016.
All research outputs
#7,224,520
of 12,517,383 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#1,054
of 2,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,674
of 362,992 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#29
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,517,383 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,120 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 362,992 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 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 61% of its contemporaries.