Tinnitus has been considered an auditory phantom percept. Recently a theoretical multiphase compensation mechanism at a cortical level has been hypothesized linking auditory deafferentation to tinnitus. This Bayesian brain model predicts that two very different kinds of tinnitus should exist, depending on the amount of hearing loss: an auditory cortex related form of tinnitus not associated with hearing loss, and a (para)hippocampal form associated with hearing loss, in which the auditory cortex might be of little relevance. In order to verify this model, resting state source analyzed EEG recordings were made in 129 tinnitus patients, and correlated to the mean hearing loss, the range of the hearing loss and the hearing loss at the tinnitus frequency. Results demonstrate that tinnitus can be linked to 2 very different mechanisms. In patients with little or no hearing loss, the tinnitus seems to be more related to auditory cortex activity, but not to (para)hippocampal memory related activity, whereas in tinnitus patients with more severe hearing loss, tinnitus seems to be related to (para)hippocampal mechanisms. Furthermore hearing loss seems to drive the communication between the auditory cortex and the parahippocampus, as measured by functional and effective connectivity.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 September 2017.
All research outputs
#8,402,134
of 32,004,021 outputs
Outputs from NeuroImage
#5,140
of 13,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,581
of 424,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age from NeuroImage
#68
of 191 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,004,021 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,191 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 424,537 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 191 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 64% of its contemporaries.
