↓ Skip to main content

Spinal Cord Stimulation Alleviates Motor Deficits in a Primate Model of Parkinson Disease

Overview of attention for article published in Neuron, November 2014
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 (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

1 news outlet
12 tweeters
1 patent
2 weibo users
32 Facebook pages


44 Dimensions

Readers on

160 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.
Spinal Cord Stimulation Alleviates Motor Deficits in a Primate Model of Parkinson Disease
Published in
Neuron, November 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.neuron.2014.08.061
Pubmed ID

Maxwell B. Santana, Pär Halje, Hougelle Simplício, Ulrike Richter, Marco Aurelio M. Freire, Per Petersson, Romulo Fuentes, Miguel A.L. Nicolelis


Although deep brain electrical stimulation can alleviate the motor symptoms of Parkinson disease (PD), just a small fraction of patients with PD can take advantage of this procedure due to its invasive nature. A significantly less invasive method--epidural spinal cord stimulation (SCS)--has been suggested as an alternative approach for symptomatic treatment of PD. However, the mechanisms underlying motor improvements through SCS are unknown. Here, we show that SCS reproducibly alleviates motor deficits in a primate model of PD. Simultaneous neuronal recordings from multiple structures of the cortico-basal ganglia-thalamic loop in parkinsonian monkeys revealed abnormal highly synchronized neuronal activity within each of these structures and excessive functional coupling among them. SCS disrupted this pathological circuit behavior in a manner that mimics the effects caused by pharmacological dopamine replacement therapy or deep brain stimulation. These results suggest that SCS should be considered as an additional treatment option for patients with PD.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 3%
France 2 1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 148 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 36 23%
Student > Master 28 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 17%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Professor 10 6%
Other 31 19%
Unknown 13 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 45 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 35 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 17%
Engineering 19 12%
Psychology 7 4%
Other 11 7%
Unknown 16 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 17 April 2018.
All research outputs
of 15,168,086 outputs
Outputs from Neuron
of 7,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 232,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuron
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,168,086 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 232,929 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 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 65% of its contemporaries.