↓ Skip to main content

Gap-Prepulse Inhibition of the Acoustic Startle Reflex (GPIAS) for Tinnitus Assessment: Current Status and Future Directions

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
86 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
Gap-Prepulse Inhibition of the Acoustic Startle Reflex (GPIAS) for Tinnitus Assessment: Current Status and Future Directions
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, April 2015
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2015.00088
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexander Galazyuk, Sylvie Hébert

Abstract

The progress in the field of tinnitus largely depends on the development of a reliable tinnitus animal model. Recently, a new method based on the acoustic startle reflex modification was introduced for tinnitus screening in laboratory animals. This method was enthusiastically adopted and now widely used by many scientists in the field due to its seeming simplicity and a number of advantages over the other methods of tinnitus assessment. Furthermore, this method opened an opportunity for tinnitus assessment in humans as well. Unfortunately, multiple modifications of data collection and interpretation implemented in different labs make comparisons across studies very difficult. In addition, recent animal and human studies have challenged the original "filling-in" interpretation of the paradigm. Here, we review the current literature to emphasize on the commonalities and differences in data collection and interpretation across laboratories that are using this method for tinnitus assessment. We also propose future research directions that could be taken in order to establish whether or not this method is warranted as an indicator of the presence of tinnitus.

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 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 85 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 14%
Student > Master 11 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 13%
Researcher 10 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 10%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 22 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 18 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 12%
Engineering 8 9%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 23 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 January 2018.
All research outputs
#3,917,206
of 22,800,560 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#3,298
of 11,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,151
of 264,516 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#22
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,800,560 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,669 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 71% 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 264,516 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.