↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Mild cognitive impairment: Conceptual, assessment, ethical, and social issues

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, September 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
114 Mendeley
Title
Mild cognitive impairment: Conceptual, assessment, ethical, and social issues
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, September 2008
DOI 10.2147/cia.s1825
Pubmed ID
Authors

Perla Werner, Amos D Korczyn

Abstract

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is defined as a condition characterized by newly acquired cognitive decline to an extent that is beyond that expected for age or educational background, yet not causing significant functional impairment. The concept of MCI has received considerable attention in the literature over the past few years, and aspects related to its definition, prevalence, and evolution have been extensively studied and reviewed. Here we attempt to synthesize the implications of the current status of this entity, focusing on the conceptual, methodological, and, in particular, the social and ethical aspects of MCI which have attracted less attention. We discuss the weaknesses of the concept of MCI, which is heterogeneous in etiology, manifestations, and outcomes, and suggest that the emergence of the syndrome at this stage reflects industrial interests related to possible development of drugs for this disorder. On the other hand, the formal diagnosis of MCI, with its implications that the person may develop dementia, may have a grave impact on the psychological state of the individual, at a stage when prediction of outcome is tenuous and possibilities of useful interventions are meager. We present suggestions for the direction of future research in these areas.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
North Macedonia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 106 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 16%
Student > Master 18 16%
Researcher 14 12%
Student > Postgraduate 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 9%
Other 32 28%
Unknown 12 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 31 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 26%
Social Sciences 8 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Neuroscience 5 4%
Other 22 19%
Unknown 12 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 23 March 2021.
All research outputs
#1,937,400
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#209
of 1,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,969
of 95,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 1,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 95,712 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.