| Title |
Examining network dynamics after traumatic brain injury using the extended unified SEM approach
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brain Imaging and Behavior, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11682-012-9205-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
F. G. Hillary, J. D. Medaglia, K. M. Gates, P. C. Molenaar, D. C. Good |
| Abstract |
The current study uses effective connectivity modeling to examine how individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) learn a new task. We make use of recent advancements in connectivity modeling (extended unified structural equation modeling, euSEM) and a novel iterative grouping procedure (Group Iterative Multiple Model Estimation, GIMME) in order to examine network flexibility after injury. The study enrolled 12 individuals sustaining moderate and severe TBI to examine the influence of task practice on connections between 8 network nodes (bilateral prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate, inferior parietal lobule, and Crus I in the cerebellum). The data demonstrate alterations in networks from pre to post practice and differences in the models based upon distinct learning trajectories observed within the TBI sample. For example, better learning in the TBI sample was associated with diminished connectivity within frontal systems and increased frontal to parietal connectivity. These findings reveal the potential for using connectivity modeling and the euSEM to examine dynamic networks during task engagement and may ultimately be informative regarding when networks are moving in and out of periods of neural efficiency. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| China | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 59 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 13 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 13 | 21% |
| Psychology | 13 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 19 | 30% |
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 18 February 2015.
All research outputs
#17,748,987
of 22,792,160 outputs
Outputs from Brain Imaging and Behavior
#813
of 1,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,234
of 180,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Imaging and Behavior
#9
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,792,160 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,155 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 180,961 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.