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 |
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Patients with Prolonged Disorders of Consciousness: Combined Behavioral and Event-Related Potential Evidence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neurology, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fneur.2017.00620 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ye Zhang, Weiqun Song, Jubao Du, Su Huo, Guixiang Shan, Ran Li |
| Abstract |
The electrophysiological evidence supporting the therapeutic efficacy of multiple transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) sessions on consciousness improvement in patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness (DOCs) has not been firmly established. To assess the effects of repeated tDCS in patients with prolonged DOCs by Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) score and event-related potential (ERP). Using a sham-controlled randomized double-blind design, 26 patients were randomly assigned to either a real [five vegetative state (VS) and eight minimally conscious state (MCS) patients] or sham (six VS and seven MCS patients) stimulation group. The patients in the real stimulation group underwent 20 anodal tDCS sessions of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) over 10 consecutive working days. The CRS-R score and P300 amplitude and latency in a hierarchical cognitive assessment were recorded to evaluate the consciousness level before tDCS and immediately after the 20 sessions. The intra-group CRS-R analysis revealed a clinically significant improvement in the MCS patients in the real stimulation group. The inter-group CRS-R analysis showed a significant difference in CRS-R between VS and MCS patients at baseline in both the real and sham stimulation groups. The intra-group ERP analysis revealed a significant increase in P300 amplitude after tDCS in the MCS patients in the real stimulation group, but no significant differences in P300 latency. For the inter-group ERP analysis, we observed significant differences regarding the presence of P300 at baseline between the VS and MCS patients in both groups. The repeated anodal tDCS of the left DLPFC could produce clinically significant improvements in MCS patients. The observed tDCS-related consciousness improvements might be related to improvements in attention resource allocation (reflected by the P300 amplitude). The findings support the use of tDCS in clinical practice and ERP might serve as an efficient electrophysiological assessment tool in patients with DOCs. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 77 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 16% |
| Unknown | 22 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 15 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 14% |
| Psychology | 9 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 28 | 36% |
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 07 December 2017.
All research outputs
#17,920,654
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#7,149
of 11,904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#305,426
of 437,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#104
of 191 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,904 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 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 437,733 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 191 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.