↓ Skip to main content

Decision-making under explicit risk is impaired in multiple sclerosis: relationships with ventricular width and disease disability

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, April 2015
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 (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Decision-making under explicit risk is impaired in multiple sclerosis: relationships with ventricular width and disease disability
Published in
BMC Neurology, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12883-015-0318-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ashley D Radomski, Christopher Power, Scot E Purdon, Derek J Emery, Gregg Blevins, Kenneth G Warren, Esther Fujiwara

Abstract

Decision-making is an essential function of everyday life. Decision making under explicit risk requires developing advantageous decision strategies based on known outcomes (e.g., probabilities of winning or losing a bet). Decision making and its neural substrates have been rarely studied in MS. We expected performance in decision making under risk to be lowered in MS patients, and negatively correlated with disease-related disability, cognition, and ventricular width. Three groups were included: 32 MS patients and 20 healthy controls were examined with conventional neuropsychological tests and the Game-of-Dice Task (GDT) assessing decision-making under explicit risk. Linear 2-D ventricular width was assessed on MS patients' clinical MRIs and compared to a third group, 20 non-MS neurological control patients. Compared to healthy controls, MS patients showed impaired GDT and neuropsychological performance, depending on the MS-subtype (relapsing-remitting (RR), n = 22; secondary progressive, n = 10) and disability severity among RR-MS patients. In MS patients, GDT performance correlated with processing speed, intercaudate ratio, and third ventricle ratio (p's < 0.05). Mediation analysis showed that the link between GDT performance and processing speed was fully explained by ventricular size. Decision-making under explicit risk was reduced in MS patients, but only those with more pronounced disability. Independent of processing speed, decision-making under explicit risk correlates inversely with central atrophy in MS.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 52 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 24%
Student > Master 9 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 15%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 5 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 31%
Neuroscience 9 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 17%
Computer Science 4 7%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 10 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 08 July 2015.
All research outputs
#1,136,337
of 10,332,319 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#176
of 1,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,209
of 212,270 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#9
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 10,332,319 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,336 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 212,270 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.