↓ Skip to main content

Application of Higuchi's fractal dimension from basic to clinical neurophysiology: A review

Overview of attention for article published in Computer Methods & Programs in Biomedicine, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
182 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
201 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.
Title
Application of Higuchi's fractal dimension from basic to clinical neurophysiology: A review
Published in
Computer Methods & Programs in Biomedicine, May 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.cmpb.2016.05.014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Srdjan Kesić, Sladjana Z. Spasić

Abstract

For more than 20 years, Higuchi's fractal dimension (HFD), as a nonlinear method, has occupied an important place in the analysis of biological signals. The use of HFD has evolved from EEG and single neuron activity analysis to the most recent application in automated assessments of different clinical conditions. Our objective is to provide an updated review of the HFD method applied in basic and clinical neurophysiological research. This article summarizes and critically reviews a broad literature and major findings concerning the applications of HFD for measuring the complexity of neuronal activity during different neurophysiological conditions. The source of information used in this review comes from the PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar and IEEE Xplore Digital Library databases. The review process substantiated the significance, advantages and shortcomings of HFD application within all key areas of basic and clinical neurophysiology. Therefore, the paper discusses HFD application alone, combined with other linear or nonlinear measures, or as a part of automated methods for analyzing neurophysiological signals. The speed, accuracy and cost of applying the HFD method for research and medical diagnosis make it stand out from the widely used linear methods. However, only a combination of HFD with other nonlinear methods ensures reliable and accurate analysis of a wide range of neurophysiological signals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 201 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Serbia 1 <1%
Unknown 198 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 16%
Student > Master 24 12%
Student > Bachelor 20 10%
Researcher 15 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 6%
Other 37 18%
Unknown 59 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 48 24%
Neuroscience 21 10%
Computer Science 20 10%
Psychology 9 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 4%
Other 26 13%
Unknown 69 34%
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 20 December 2018.
All research outputs
#16,063,069
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Computer Methods & Programs in Biomedicine
#1,085
of 2,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,586
of 353,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Computer Methods & Programs in Biomedicine
#14
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,060 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 353,085 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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 55% of its contemporaries.