↓ Skip to main content

Scale and pattern of atrophy in the chronic stages of moderate-severe TBI

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
98 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.
Article details
Title
Scale and pattern of atrophy in the chronic stages of moderate-severe TBI
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, March 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00067
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Background: Moderate-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is increasingly being understood as a progressive disorder, with growing evidence of reduced brain volume and white matter (WM) integrity as well as lesion expansion in the chronic phases of injury. The scale of these losses has yet to be investigated, and pattern of change across structures has received limited attention. Objectives: (1) To measure the percentage of patients in our TBI sample showing atrophy from 5 to 20 months post-injury in the whole brain and in structures with known vulnerability to acute TBI, and (2) To examine relative vulnerability and patterns of volume loss across structures. Methods: Fifty-six TBI patients [complicated mild to severe, with mean Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) in severe range] underwent MRI at, on average, 5 and 20 months post-injury; 12 healthy controls underwent MRI twice, with a mean gap between scans of 25.4 months. Mean monthly percent volume change was computed for whole brain (ventricle-to-brain ratio; VBR), corpus callosum (CC), and right and left hippocampi (HPC). Results: (1) Using a threshold of 2 z-scores below controls, 96% of patients showed atrophy across time points in at least one region; 75% showed atrophy in at least 3 of the 4 regions measured. (2) There were no significant differences in the proportion of patients who showed atrophy across structures. For those showing decline in VBR, there was a significant association with both the CC and the right HPC (P < 0.05 for both comparisons). There were also significant associations between those showing decline in (i) right and left HPC (P < 0.05); (ii) all combinations of genu, body and splenium of the CC (P < 0.05), and (iii) head and tail of the right HPC (P < 0.05 all sub-structure comparisons). Conclusions: Atrophy in chronic TBI is robust, and the CC, right HPC and left HPC appear equally vulnerable. Significant associations between the right and left HPC, and within substructures of the CC and right HPC, raise the possibility of common mechanisms for these regions, including transneuronal degeneration. Given the 96% incidence rate of atrophy, a genetic explanation is unlikely to explain all findings. Multiple and possibly synergistic mechanisms may explain findings. Atrophy has been associated with poorer functional outcomes, but recent findings suggest there is potential to offset this. A better, understanding of the underlying mechanisms could permit targeted therapy enabling better long-term outcomes.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Canada 2 2%
Netherlands 1 1%
Ireland 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 93 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 17%
Student > Bachelor 12 12%
Researcher 12 12%
Student > Master 11 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 6%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 29 30%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 22 22%
Psychology 14 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 39 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 09 July 2014.
All research outputs
#5,327,171
of 28,840,878 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,064
of 8,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,283
of 244,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#65
of 163 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,840,878 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,147 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
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 244,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 163 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 59% of its contemporaries.