↓ Skip to main content

Electro-physiological changes in the brain induced by caffeine or glucose nasal spray

Overview of attention for article published in Psychopharmacology, September 2016
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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
30 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
Title
Electro-physiological changes in the brain induced by caffeine or glucose nasal spray
Published in
Psychopharmacology, September 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00213-016-4435-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

K De Pauw, B Roelands, J Van Cutsem, U Marusic, T Torbeyns, R Meeusen

Abstract

A direct link between the mouth cavity and the brain for glucose (GLUC) and caffeine (CAF) has been established. The aim of this study is to determine whether a direct link for both substrates also exist between the nasal cavity and the brain. Ten healthy male subjects (age 22 ± 1 years) performed three experimental trials, separated by at least 2 days. Each trial included a 20-s nasal spray (NAS) period in which solutions placebo (PLAC), GLUC, or CAF were provided in a double-blind, randomized order. During each trial, four cognitive Stroop tasks were performed: two familiarization trials and one pre- and one post-NAS trial. Reaction times and accuracy for different stimuli (neutral, NEUTR; congruent, CON; incongruent INCON) were determined. Electroencephalography was continuously measured throughout the trials. During the Stroop tasks pre- and post-NAS, the P300 was assessed and during NAS, source localization was performed using standardized low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA). NAS activated the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). CAF-NAS also increased θ and β activity in frontal cortices. Furthermore, GLUC-NAS increased the β activity within the insula. GLUC-NAS also increased the P300 amplitude with INCON (P = 0.046) and reduced P300 amplitude at F3-F4 and P300 latency at CP1-CP2-Cz with NEUTR (P = 0.001 and P = 0.016, respectively). The existence of nasal bitter and sweet taste receptors possibly induce these brain responses. Greater cognitive efficiency was observed with GLUC-NAS. CAF-NAS activated cingulate, insular, and sensorymotor cortices, whereas GLUC-NAS activated sensory, cingulate, and insular cortices. However, no effect on the Stroop task was found.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users 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 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 93 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 14%
Student > Bachelor 13 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Other 5 5%
Researcher 4 4%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 37 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 13 14%
Psychology 9 10%
Neuroscience 8 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 40 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 19 January 2023.
All research outputs
#1,980,458
of 25,231,854 outputs
Outputs from Psychopharmacology
#474
of 5,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,609
of 329,624 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychopharmacology
#9
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,231,854 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 5,642 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 329,624 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.