↓ Skip to main content

Probabilistic mapping of deep brain stimulation effects in essential tremor

Overview of attention for article published in NeuroImage: Clinical, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
90 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
114 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Probabilistic mapping of deep brain stimulation effects in essential tremor
Published in
NeuroImage: Clinical, November 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.nicl.2016.11.019
Pubmed ID
Authors

Till A Dembek, Michael T Barbe, Mattias Åström, Mauritius Hoevels, Veerle Visser-Vandewalle, Gereon R Fink, Lars Timmermann

Abstract

To create probabilistic stimulation maps (PSMs) of deep brain stimulation (DBS) effects on tremor suppression and stimulation-induced side-effects in patients with essential tremor (ET). Monopolar reviews from 16 ET-patients which consisted of over 600 stimulation settings were used to create PSMs. A spherical model of the volume of neural activation was used to estimate the spatial extent of DBS for each setting. All data was pooled and voxel-wise statistical analysis as well as nonparametric permutation testing was used to confirm the validity of the PSMs. PSMs showed tremor suppression to be more pronounced by stimulation in the zona incerta (ZI) than in the ventral intermediate nucleus (VIM). Paresthesias and dizziness were most commonly associated with stimulation in the ZI and surrounding thalamic nuclei. Our results support the assumption, that the ZI might be a very effective target for tremor suppression. However stimulation inside the ZI and in its close vicinity was also related to the occurrence of stimulation-induced side-effects, so it remains unclear whether the VIM or the ZI is the overall better target. The study demonstrates the use of PSMs for target selection and evaluation. While their accuracy has to be carefully discussed, they can improve the understanding of DBS effects and can be of use for other DBS targets in the therapy of neurological or psychiatric disorders as well. Furthermore they provide a priori information about expected DBS effects in a certain region and might be helpful to clinicians in programming DBS devices in the future.

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 %
Unknown 114 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 19%
Researcher 17 15%
Student > Master 14 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 19 17%
Unknown 26 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 24%
Engineering 15 13%
Neuroscience 15 13%
Psychology 5 4%
Computer Science 5 4%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 39 34%
Attention Score in Context

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 26 July 2022.
All research outputs
#8,533,995
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from NeuroImage: Clinical
#1,410
of 2,802 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,273
of 417,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age from NeuroImage: Clinical
#41
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,802 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 417,789 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.