↓ Skip to main content

Development, manufacturing and application of double-sided flexible implantable microelectrodes

Overview of attention for article published in Biomedical Microdevices, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
Development, manufacturing and application of double-sided flexible implantable microelectrodes
Published in
Biomedical Microdevices, July 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10544-014-9887-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wigand Poppendieck, Adam Sossalla, Marc-Oliver Krob, Christine Welsch, T. A. Khoa Nguyen, Wangsong Gong, Jack DiGiovanna, Silvestro Micera, Daniel M. Merfeld, Klaus-Peter Hoffmann

Abstract

Many neuroprosthetic applications require the use of very small, flexible multi-channel microelectrodes (e.g. polyimide-based film-like electrodes) to fit anatomical constraints. By arranging the electrode contacts on both sides of the polyimide film, selectivity can be further increased without increasing size. In this work, two approaches to create such double-sided electrodes are described and compared: sandwich electrodes prepared by precisely gluing two single-sided structures together, and monolithic electrodes created using a new double-sided photolithography process. Both methods were successfully applied to manufacture double-sided electrodes for stimulation of the vestibular system. In a case study, the electrodes were implanted in the semicircular canals of three guinea pigs and proven to provide electrical stimulation of the vestibular nerve. For both the monolithic electrodes and the sandwich electrodes, long-term stability and functionality was observed over a period of more than 12 months. Comparing the two types of electrodes with respect to the manufacturing process, it can be concluded that monolithic electrodes are the preferred solution for very thin electrodes (<20 μm), while sandwich electrode technology is especially suitable for thicker electrodes (40-50 μm).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Germany 1 3%
Unknown 38 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 20%
Researcher 8 20%
Student > Master 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 5 13%
Professor 3 8%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 2 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 18 45%
Neuroscience 6 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 5 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 03 August 2014.
All research outputs
#18,375,478
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from Biomedical Microdevices
#611
of 746 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,980
of 228,346 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomedical Microdevices
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 746 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 228,346 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.