↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users
reddit
3 Redditors

Readers on

mendeley
132 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
Deep Brain Stimulation Targeting the Fornix for Mild Alzheimer Dementia (the ADvance Trial): A Two Year Follow-up Including Results of Delayed Activation
Published in
Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, June 2018
DOI 10.3233/jad-180121
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Given recent challenges in developing new treatments for Alzheimer dementia (AD), it is vital to explore alternate treatment targets, such as neuromodulation for circuit dysfunction. We previously reported an exploratory Phase IIb double-blind trial of deep brain stimulation targeting the fornix (DBS-f) in mild AD (the ADvance trial). We reported safety but no clinical benefits of DBS-f versus the delayed-on (sham) treatment in 42 participants after one year. However, secondary post hoc analyses of the one-year data suggested a possible DBS-f benefit for participants≥65 years. To examine the long-term safety and clinical effects of sustained and delayed-on DBS-f treatment of mild AD after two years. 42 participants underwent implantation of DBS-f electrodes, with half randomized to active DBS-f stimulation (early on) for two years and half to delayed-on (sham) stimulation after 1 year to provide 1 year of active DBS-f stimulation (delayed on). We evaluated safety and clinical outcomes over the two years of the trial. DBS-f had a favorable safety profile with similar rates of adverse events across both trial phases (years 1 and 2) and between treatment arms. There were no differences between treatment arms on any primary clinical outcomes. However, post-hoc age group analyses suggested a possible benefit among older (>65) participants. DBS-f was safe. Additional study of mechanisms of action and methods for titrating stimulation parameters will be needed to determine if DBS has potential as an AD treatment. Future efficacy studies should focus on patients over age 65.

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 5 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 132 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 132 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 13%
Researcher 15 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 9%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Student > Postgraduate 10 8%
Other 31 23%
Unknown 37 28%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 31 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 18%
Psychology 9 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 14 11%
Unknown 47 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 87. 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 21 December 2022.
All research outputs
#603,112
of 32,805,761 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Alzheimer's Disease
#394
of 9,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,238
of 362,581 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Alzheimer's Disease
#18
of 215 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,805,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,120 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 362,581 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 215 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.