| Title |
Exploratory study of the effect of brain tumors on the default mode network
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Neuro-Oncology, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11060-016-2129-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sukhmanjit Ghumman, D. Fortin, M. Noel-Lamy, S. C. Cunnane, K. Whittingstall |
| Abstract |
Resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging (RS-fMRI) is a popular method of visualizing functional networks in the brain. One of these networks, the default mode network (DMN), has exhibited altered connectivity in a variety of pathological states, including brain tumors. However, very few studies have attempted to link the effect of tumor localization, type and size on DMN connectivity. We collected RS-fMRI data in 73 patients with various brain tumors and attempted to characterize the different effects these tumors had on DMN connectivity based on their location, type and size. This was done by comparing the tumor patients with healthy controls using independent component analysis (ICA) and seed based analysis. We also used a multi-seed approach described in the paper to account for anatomy distortion in the tumor patients. We found that tumors in the left hemisphere had the largest effect on DMN connectivity regardless of their size and type, while this effect was not observed for right hemispheric tumors. Tumors in the cerebellum also had statistically significant effects on DMN connectivity. These results suggest that DMN connectivity in the left side of the brain may be more fragile to insults by lesions. |
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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 53 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 30% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 19% |
| Researcher | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 6 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 19 | 36% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 21% |
| Engineering | 6 | 11% |
| Psychology | 4 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 15% |
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 12 June 2016.
All research outputs
#18,463,662
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#2,244
of 2,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,053
of 299,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#22
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 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 2,977 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 299,128 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 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.