↓ Skip to main content

Mechanisms Underlying Decision-Making as Revealed by Deep-Brain Stimulation in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease

Overview of attention for article published in Current Biology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users

Readers on

mendeley
199 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
Mechanisms Underlying Decision-Making as Revealed by Deep-Brain Stimulation in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease
Published in
Current Biology, March 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.cub.2018.02.057
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To optimally balance opposing demands of speed and accuracy during decision-making, we must flexibly adapt how much evidence we require before making a choice. Such adjustments in decision thresholds have been linked to the subthalamic nucleus (STN), and therapeutic STN deep-brain stimulation (DBS) has been shown to interfere with this function. Here, we performed continuous as well as closed-loop DBS of the STN while Parkinson's disease patients performed a perceptual decision-making task. Closed-loop STN DBS allowed temporally patterned STN stimulation and simultaneous recordings of STN activity. This revealed that DBS only affected patients' ability to adjust decision thresholds if applied in a specific temporally confined time window during deliberation. Only stimulation in that window diminished the normal slowing of response times that occurred on difficult trials when DBS was turned off. Furthermore, DBS eliminated a relative, time-specific increase in STN beta oscillations and compromised its functional relationship with trial-by-trial adjustments in decision thresholds. Together, these results provide causal evidence that the STN is involved in adjusting decision thresholds in distinct, time-limited processing windows during deliberation.

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 profiles of 15 X users 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 199 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 %
Unknown 199 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 40 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 19%
Student > Master 15 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 5%
Student > Bachelor 9 5%
Other 32 16%
Unknown 55 28%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 59 30%
Psychology 17 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 7%
Engineering 9 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 3%
Other 16 8%
Unknown 78 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 24 August 2018.
All research outputs
#4,188,288
of 27,629,018 outputs
Outputs from Current Biology
#6,944
of 15,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,698
of 348,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Biology
#126
of 227 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,629,018 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,264 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 64.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 348,469 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 227 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.