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 |
Movement-related cortical potentials in paraplegic patients: abnormal patterns and considerations for BCI-rehabilitation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroengineering, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fneng.2014.00035 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ren Xu, Ning Jiang, Aleksandra Vuckovic, Muhammad Hasan, Natalie Mrachacz-Kersting, David Allan, Matthew Fraser, Bahman Nasseroleslami, Bernie Conway, Kim Dremstrup, Dario Farina |
| Abstract |
Non-invasive EEG-based Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCI) can be promising for the motor neuro-rehabilitation of paraplegic patients. However, this shall require detailed knowledge of the abnormalities in the EEG signatures of paraplegic patients. The association of abnormalities in different subgroups of patients and their relation to the sensorimotor integration are relevant for the design, implementation and use of BCI systems in patient populations. This study explores the patterns of abnormalities of movement related cortical potentials (MRCP) during motor imagery tasks of feet and right hand in patients with paraplegia (including the subgroups with/without central neuropathic pain (CNP) and complete/incomplete injury patients) and the level of distinctiveness of abnormalities in these groups using pattern classification. The most notable observed abnormalities were the amplified execution negativity and its slower rebound in the patient group. The potential underlying mechanisms behind these changes and other minor dissimilarities in patients' subgroups, as well as the relevance to BCI applications, are discussed. The findings are of interest from a neurological perspective as well as for BCI-assisted neuro-rehabilitation and therapy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 3 | 2% |
| Denmark | 2 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 134 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 32 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 26 | 19% |
| Researcher | 20 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 12% |
| Other | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 19 | 14% |
| Unknown | 21 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 48 | 34% |
| Neuroscience | 21 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 7% |
| Sports and Recreations | 9 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 19 | 14% |
| Unknown | 27 | 19% |
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 27 May 2015.
All research outputs
#15,303,896
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroengineering
#49
of 82 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,464
of 236,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroengineering
#9
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 82 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 236,468 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.