↓ Skip to main content

Classification of Sleep Disorders

Overview of attention for article published in Neurotherapeutics, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#39 of 612)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 tweeters
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
100 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Classification of Sleep Disorders
Published in
Neurotherapeutics, September 2012
DOI 10.1007/s13311-012-0145-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael J. Thorpy

Abstract

The classification of sleep disorders is necessary to discriminate between disorders and to facilitate an understanding of symptoms, etiology, and pathophysiology that allows for appropriate treatment. The earliest classification systems, largely organized according to major symptoms (insomnia, excessive sleepiness, and abnormal events that occur during sleep), were unable to be based on pathophysiology because the cause of most sleep disorders was unknown. These 3 symptom-based categories are easily understood by physicians and are therefore useful for developing a differential diagnosis. The International Classification of Sleep Disorders, version 2, published in 2005 and currently undergoing revision, combines a symptomatic presentation (e.g., insomnia) with 1 organized in part on pathophysiology (e.g., circadian rhythms) and in part on body systems (e.g., breathing disorders). This organization of sleep disorders is necessary because of the varied nature and because the pathophysiology for many of the disorders is still unknown. The International Classification of Sleep Disorders, version 2 provides relevant diagnostic and epidemiological information on sleep disorders to more easily differentiate between the disorders.

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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 10 40%
Student > Master 5 20%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Other 4 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 11 44%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Neuroscience 2 8%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 2 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 October 2018.
All research outputs
#606,439
of 13,663,123 outputs
Outputs from Neurotherapeutics
#39
of 612 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,870
of 128,004 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurotherapeutics
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,663,123 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 612 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 128,004 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.