| Title |
Understanding variability in the BOLD signal and why it matters for aging
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brain Imaging and Behavior, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11682-013-9253-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cheryl L. Grady, Douglas D. Garrett |
| Abstract |
Recent work in neuroscience supports the idea that variability in brain function is necessary for optimal brain responsivity to a changing environment. In this review, we discuss a series of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies in younger and older adults to assess age-related differences in variability of the fMRI signal. This work shows that moment-to-moment brain signal variability represents an important "signal" within what is typically considered measurement-related "noise" in fMRI. This accumulation of evidence suggests that moving beyond the mean will provide a complementary window into aging-related neural processes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 230 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Israel | 1 | <1% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 215 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 69 | 30% |
| Researcher | 41 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 6% |
| Other | 31 | 13% |
| Unknown | 38 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 67 | 29% |
| Neuroscience | 46 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 5% |
| Engineering | 11 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 25 | 11% |
| Unknown | 58 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 October 2019.
All research outputs
#14,805,023
of 22,794,367 outputs
Outputs from Brain Imaging and Behavior
#626
of 1,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,714
of 197,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Imaging and Behavior
#12
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,794,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 197,128 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.