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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Neuroanatomical Alterations in Tinnitus Assessed with Magnetic Resonance Imaging
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnagi.2016.00221 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thomas W. Allan, Julien Besle, Dave R. M. Langers, Jeff Davies, Deborah A. Hall, Alan R. Palmer, Peyman Adjamian |
| Abstract |
Previous studies of anatomical changes associated with tinnitus have provided inconsistent results, with some showing significant cortical and subcortical changes, while others have found effects due to hearing loss, but not tinnitus. In this study, we examined changes in brain anatomy associated with tinnitus using anatomical scans from 128 participants with tinnitus and hearing loss, tinnitus with clinically normal hearing, and non-tinnitus controls with clinically normal hearing. The groups were matched for hearing loss, age and gender. We employed voxel- and surface-based morphometry (SBM) to investigate gray and white matter volume and thickness within regions-of-interest (ROI) that were based on the results of previous studies. The largest overall effects were found for age, gender, and hearing loss. With regard to tinnitus, analysis of ROI revealed numerous small increases and decreases in gray matter and thickness between tinnitus and non-tinnitus controls, in both cortical and subcortical structures. For whole brain analysis, the main tinnitus-related significant clusters were found outside sensory auditory structures. These include a decrease in cortical thickness for the tinnitus group compared to controls in the left superior frontal gyrus (SFG), and a decrease in cortical volume with hearing loss in left Heschl's gyrus (HG). For masked analysis, we found a decrease in gray matter volume in the right Heschle's gyrus for the tinnitus group compared to the controls. We found no changes in the subcallosal region as reported in some previous studies. Overall, while some of the morphological differences observed in this study are similar to previously published findings, others are entirely different or even contradict previous results. We highlight other discrepancies among previous results and the increasing need for a more precise subtyping of the condition. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 48 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 24% |
| Researcher | 11 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 18% |
| Unknown | 3 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 25% |
| Neuroscience | 12 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 10% |
| Engineering | 5 | 10% |
| Psychology | 5 | 10% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 6 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 13 July 2017.
All research outputs
#6,065,765
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#2,363
of 4,820 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,373
of 320,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#34
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 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 4,820 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 320,659 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.