↓ Skip to main content

Mapping causal interregional influences with concurrent TMS–fMRI

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, October 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 (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
198 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
347 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Mapping causal interregional influences with concurrent TMS–fMRI
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, October 2008
DOI 10.1007/s00221-008-1601-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sven Bestmann, Christian C. Ruff, Felix Blankenburg, Nikolaus Weiskopf, Jon Driver, John C. Rothwell

Abstract

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) produces a direct causal effect on brain activity that can now be studied by new approaches that simultaneously combine TMS with neuroimaging methods, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). In this review we highlight recent concurrent TMS-fMRI studies that illustrate how this novel combined technique may provide unique insights into causal interactions among brain regions in humans. We show how fMRI can detect the spatial topography of local and remote TMS effects and how these may vary with psychological factors such as task-state. Concurrent TMS-fMRI may furthermore reveal how the brain adapts to so-called virtual lesions induced by TMS, and the distributed activity changes that may underlie the behavioural consequences often observed during cortical stimulation with TMS. We argue that combining TMS with neuroimaging techniques allows a further step in understanding the physiological underpinnings of TMS, as well as the neural correlated of TMS-evoked consequences on perception and behaviour. This can provide powerful new insights about causal interactions among brain regions in both health and disease that may ultimately lead to developing more efficient protocols for basic research and therapeutic TMS applications.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 347 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 2%
United Kingdom 6 2%
Italy 3 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
Germany 3 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Denmark 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Other 4 1%
Unknown 316 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 78 22%
Researcher 71 20%
Student > Master 40 12%
Student > Bachelor 27 8%
Professor 26 7%
Other 71 20%
Unknown 34 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 102 29%
Neuroscience 61 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 43 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 41 12%
Engineering 27 8%
Other 26 7%
Unknown 47 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 15 September 2022.
All research outputs
#2,932,457
of 23,931,731 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#201
of 3,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,285
of 93,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#5
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,931,731 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,309 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. 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 93,076 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 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.