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 |
Current Challenges Facing the Translation of Brain Computer Interfaces from Preclinical Trials to Use in Human Patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fncel.2015.00497 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maxwell D. Murphy, David J. Guggenmos, David T. Bundy, Randolph J. Nudo |
| Abstract |
Current research in brain computer interface (BCI) technology is advancing beyond preclinical studies, with trials beginning in human patients. To date, these trials have been carried out with several different types of recording interfaces. The success of these devices has varied widely, but different factors such as the level of invasiveness, timescale of recorded information, and ability to maintain stable functionality of the device over a long period of time all must be considered in addition to accuracy in decoding intent when assessing the most practical type of device moving forward. Here, we discuss various approaches to BCIs, distinguishing between devices focusing on control of operations extrinsic to the subject (e.g., prosthetic limbs, computer cursors) and those focusing on control of operations intrinsic to the brain (e.g., using stimulation or external feedback), including closed-loop or adaptive devices. In this discussion, we consider the current challenges facing the translation of various types of BCI technology to eventual human application. |
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 States | 2 | 40% |
| Belgium | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 134 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 35 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 12% |
| Researcher | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 20 | 14% |
| Unknown | 24 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 50 | 36% |
| Neuroscience | 13 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 8% |
| Psychology | 7 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 22 | 16% |
| Unknown | 29 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 50. 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 06 April 2023.
All research outputs
#784,609
of 24,378,498 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#79
of 4,527 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,233
of 403,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#3
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,378,498 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,527 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 403,020 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.