↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
62 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
Laser-Evoked Potentials in Fibromyalgia: The Influence of Greater Occipital Nerve Stimulation on Cerebral Pain Processing
Published in
Neuromodulation, May 2015
DOI 10.1111/ner.12310
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Fibromyalgia causes widespread musculo-skeletal pain in the four quadrants of the body. Greater occipital nerve stimulation has recently shown beneficial effects in fibromyalgia patients on pain, fatigue, and mood disorders. Laser-evoked potentials (LEPs) are used for research to understand the pathophysiological mechanisms of pain and to evaluate the effects of pain treatment. In fibromyalgia patients, LEPs tend to have a higher N2 amplitude, a tendency to shorter latencies, and patients have a lower pain threshold. Greater occipital nerve stimulation might exert a modulation of the medial pain pathways processing the affective motivational components of pain (unpleasantness) as well as the descending pain inhibitory pathways (reducing pain), both of which are contributing to the N2P2 peak. To test this hypothesis, the authors performed LEPs in a group of fibromyalgia patients with and without greater occipital nerve stimulation. Occipital nerve stimulation does not alter the amplitudes of the LEP recordings, although a significant difference in latencies can be seen. More specifically, latencies of the N2P2 increased in the condition after stimulation, and especially at the Pz electrode. Our results suggest Occipital Nerve Stimulation (ONS) induces a modification of the balance between antinociceptive pain inhibitory pathways and pain-provoking pathways.

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 3 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 62 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 %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 61 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 18 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 10%
Psychology 6 10%
Neuroscience 5 8%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 23 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 May 2015.
All research outputs
#23,460,772
of 34,559,526 outputs
Outputs from Neuromodulation
#1,178
of 1,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,303
of 307,939 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuromodulation
#20
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,559,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,672 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 307,939 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.