↓ Skip to main content

Traumatic brain injury: An EEG point of view

Overview of attention for article published in Dementia & Neuropsychologia, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
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.
Title
Traumatic brain injury: An EEG point of view
Published in
Dementia & Neuropsychologia, January 2017
DOI 10.1590/1980-57642016dn11-010002
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jéssica Natuline Ianof, Renato Anghinah

Abstract

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a silent epidemic. Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) causes brain injury that results in electrophysiologic abnormalities visible on electroencephalography (EEG) recordings. The purpose of this brief review was to discuss the importance of EEG findings in traumatic brain injury. Relevant articles published during the 1996-2016 period were retrieved from Medline (PubMed). The keywords were in English and included "traumatic brain injury", "EEG" and "quantitative EEG". We found 460 articles, analyzed 52 and selected 13 articles. EEG after TBI shows slowing of the posterior dominant rhythm and increased diffuse theta slowing, which may revert to normal within hours or may clear more slowly over many weeks. There are no clear EEG or quantitative EEG (qEEG) features unique to mild traumatic brain injury. Although the literature indicates the promise of qEEG in reaching a diagnosis and indicating prognosis of mTBI, further study is needed to corroborate and refine these methods.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Student > Master 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Student > Postgraduate 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 29 52%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 10 18%
Psychology 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Arts and Humanities 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 30 54%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 04 April 2023.
All research outputs
#7,357,897
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Dementia & Neuropsychologia
#176
of 328 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,117
of 421,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dementia & Neuropsychologia
#11
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 328 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 421,709 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.