↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Corpus callosum infarction with cognitive dysfunction: two case reports and literature review

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, February 2018
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 (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
Title
Corpus callosum infarction with cognitive dysfunction: two case reports and literature review
Published in
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, February 2018
DOI 10.2147/ndt.s155487
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jianyu Zhang, Yi Tang, Yongan Sun, Yingda Xu, Lingen Pang, Jiaojiao Li, Taotao Wu, Mingli He

Abstract

The incidence of corpus callosum infarction is low, and sudden cognitive dysfunction caused by corpus callosum infarction is very rare. We report two cases of acute corpus callosum infarction with sudden cognitive impairment, and the related basis, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, differential diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of this disease are reviewed. The two patients had sudden and severe memory impairment and spatial orientation disorder. Their cognitive function scores were significantly lower, and their MRI demonstrated clear corpus callosum infarction. Through treatment, the symptoms improved significantly. This paper reports two cases with corpus callosum infarction with sudden cognitive impairment, and its relevant background is also reviewed, which will help doctors with the classification diagnosis of cerebral infarction and understanding of corpus callosum infarction.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 17%
Student > Master 3 17%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Researcher 2 11%
Other 1 6%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 4 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Psychology 1 6%
Unspecified 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 39%

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 15 February 2018.
All research outputs
#8,609,038
of 15,002,747 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#1,077
of 2,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,039
of 364,775 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#36
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,002,747 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,466 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 364,775 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 85 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 56% of its contemporaries.