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 |
Localization of Interictal Epileptiform Activity Using Magnetoencephalography with Synthetic Aperture Magnetometry in Patients with a Vagus Nerve Stimulator
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neurology, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fneur.2014.00244 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jennifer R. Stapleton-Kotloski, Robert J. Kotloski, Jane A. Boggs, Gautam Popli, Cormac A. O’Donovan, Daniel E. Couture, Cassandra Cornell, Dwayne W. Godwin |
| Abstract |
Magnetoencephalography (MEG) provides useful and non-redundant information in the evaluation of patients with epilepsy, and in particular, during the pre-surgical evaluation of pharmaco-resistant epilepsy. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is a common treatment for pharmaco-resistant epilepsy. However, interpretation of MEG recordings from patients with a VNS is challenging due to the severe magnetic artifacts produced by the VNS. We used synthetic aperture magnetometry (g2) [SAM(g2)], an adaptive beamformer that maps the excessive kurtosis, to map interictal spikes to the coregistered MRI image, despite the presence of contaminating VNS artifact. We present a series of eight patients with a VNS who underwent MEG recording. Localization of interictal epileptiform activity by SAM(g2) is compared to invasive electrophysiologic monitoring and other localizing approaches. While the raw MEG recordings were uninterpretable, analysis of the recordings with SAM(g2) identified foci of peak kurtosis and source signal activity that was unaffected by the VNS artifact. SAM(g2) analysis of MEG recordings in patients with a VNS produces interpretable results and expands the use of MEG for the pre-surgical evaluation of epilepsy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 13% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 20% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 20% |
| Engineering | 3 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 10 | 33% |
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 November 2014.
All research outputs
#18,384,336
of 22,771,140 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#7,692
of 11,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#262,069
of 361,861 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#55
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,771,140 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,666 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 361,861 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.