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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Interaction between osseous and non-osseous vibratory stimulation of the human cadaveric head
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Hearing Research, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.heares.2016.01.013 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J.H. Sim, I. Dobrev, R. Gerig, F. Pfiffner, S. Stenfelt, A.M. Huber, C. Röösli |
| Abstract |
Bone conduction (BC) stimulation can be applied by vibration to the bony or skin covered skull (osseous BC), or on soft tissue such as the neck (non-osseous BC). The interaction between osseous and non-osseous bone conduction pathways is assessed in this study. The relation between bone vibrations measured at the cochlear promontory and the intracranial sound pressure for stimulation directly on the dura and for stimulation at the mastoid between 0.2 - 10 kHz was compared. First, for stimulation on the dura, varying the static coupling force of the BC transducer on the dura had only a small effect on promontory vibration. Second, the presence or absence of intracranial fluid did not affect promontory vibration for stimulation on the dura. Third, stimulation on the mastoid elicited both promontory vibration and intracranial sound pressure. Stimulation on the dura caused intracranial sound pressure to a similar extent above 0.5 kHz compared to stimulation on the mastoid, while promontory vibration was less by 20-40 dB. From these findings, we conclude that intracranial sound pressure (non-osseous BC) only marginally affects bone vibrations measured on the promontory (osseous BC), whereas skull vibrations affect intracranial sound pressure. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 19% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 5 | 31% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Psychology | 1 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 38% |
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 26 January 2016.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Hearing Research
#1,570
of 1,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#345,543
of 403,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Hearing Research
#32
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,752 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 403,884 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.