↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Neuropsychological and neurophysiological insights into hoarding disorder

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
Title
Neuropsychological and neurophysiological insights into hoarding disorder
Published in
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, April 2015
DOI 10.2147/ndt.s62084
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jessica Grisham, Peter Baldwin

Abstract

Hoarding disorder (HD) is associated with significant personal impairment in function and constitutes a severe public health burden. Individuals who hoard experience intense distress in discarding a large number of objects, which results in extreme clutter. Research and theory suggest that hoarding may be associated with specific deficits in information processing, particularly in the areas of attention, memory, and executive functioning. There is also growing interest in the neural underpinnings of hoarding behavior. Thus, the primary aim of this review is to summarize the current state of evidence regarding neuropsychological deficits associated with hoarding and review research on its neurophysiological underpinnings. We also outline the prominent theoretical model of hoarding and provide an up-to-date description of empirically based psychological and medical treatment approaches for HD. Finally, we discuss important future avenues for elaborating our model of HD and improving treatment access and outcomes for this disabling disorder.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 71 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 18%
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 14%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Other 16 22%
Unknown 6 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 37 51%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 15%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 11 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 25 February 2021.
All research outputs
#9,871,281
of 17,814,645 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#1,075
of 2,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,927
of 241,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#22
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,814,645 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,693 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 241,727 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 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.