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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A Model of Brain Circulation and Metabolism: NIRS Signal Changes during Physiological Challenges
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLoS Computational Biology, November 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000212 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Murad Banaji, Alfred Mallet, Clare E. Elwell, Peter Nicholls, Chris E. Cooper |
| Abstract |
We construct a model of brain circulation and energy metabolism. The model is designed to explain experimental data and predict the response of the circulation and metabolism to a variety of stimuli, in particular, changes in arterial blood pressure, CO(2) levels, O(2) levels, and functional activation. Significant model outputs are predictions about blood flow, metabolic rate, and quantities measurable noninvasively using near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), including cerebral blood volume and oxygenation and the redox state of the Cu(A) centre in cytochrome c oxidase. These quantities are now frequently measured in clinical settings; however the relationship between the measurements and the underlying physiological events is in general complex. We anticipate that the model will play an important role in helping to understand the NIRS signals, in particular, the cytochrome signal, which has been hard to interpret. A range of model simulations are presented, and model outputs are compared to published data obtained from both in vivo and in vitro settings. The comparisons are encouraging, showing that the model is able to reproduce observed behaviour in response to various stimuli. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 3% |
| Japan | 3 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 132 | 87% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 22% |
| Researcher | 25 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 15 | 10% |
| Professor | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 31 | 21% |
| Unknown | 19 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 31 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 11% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 14 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 34 | 23% |
| Unknown | 24 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 09 February 2009.
All research outputs
#17,320,760
of 25,420,980 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#7,488
of 8,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,415
of 104,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#38
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,420,980 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,977 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 104,472 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.