↓ Skip to main content

Do Studies on Cortical Plasticity Provide a Rationale for Using Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation as a Treatment for Parkinson’s Disease Patients?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
150 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.
Title
Do Studies on Cortical Plasticity Provide a Rationale for Using Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation as a Treatment for Parkinson’s Disease Patients?
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2013.00180
Pubmed ID
Authors

Giacomo Koch

Abstract

Animal models of Parkinson's disease (PD) have shown that key mechanisms of cortical plasticity such as long-term potentiation (LTP) and long-term depression (LTD) can be impaired by the PD pathology. In humans protocols of non-invasive brain stimulation, such as paired associative stimulation (PAS) and theta-burst stimulation (TBS), can be used to investigate cortical plasticity of the primary motor cortex. Through the amplitude of the motor evoked potential these transcranial magnetic stimulation methods allow to measure both LTP-like and LTD-like mechanisms of cortical plasticity. So far these protocols have reported some controversial findings when tested in PD patients. While various studies described evidence for reduced LTP- and LTD-like plasticity, others showed different results, demonstrating increased LTP-like and normal LTD-like plasticity. Recent evidence provided support to the hypothesis that these different patterns of cortical plasticity likely depend on the stage of the disease and on the concomitant administration of l-DOPA. However, it is still unclear how and if these altered mechanisms of cortical plasticity can be taken as a reliable model to build appropriate protocols aimed at treating PD symptoms by applying repetitive sessions of repetitive TMS (rTMS) or transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). The current article will provide an up-to-date overview of these issues together with some reflections on future studies in the field.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 150 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 146 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 39 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 13%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Other 11 7%
Student > Master 10 7%
Other 33 22%
Unknown 23 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 24%
Neuroscience 30 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 11%
Psychology 14 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 2%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 35 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 05 April 2014.
All research outputs
#6,770,149
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#4,293
of 11,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,823
of 280,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#31
of 210 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,635 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 280,769 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 210 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.