↓ Skip to main content

Revisiting Hydrocephalus as a Model to Study Brain Resilience

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2012
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
5 X users
q&a
2 Q&A threads
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
Revisiting Hydrocephalus as a Model to Study Brain Resilience
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2011.00181
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matheus Fernandes de Oliveira, Fernando Campos Gomes Pinto, Koshiro Nishikuni, Ricardo Vieira Botelho, Alessandra Moura Lima, José Marcus Rotta

Abstract

Hydrocephalus is an entity which embraces a variety of diseases whose final result is the enlarged size of cerebral ventricular system, partially or completely. The physiopathology of hydrocephalus lies in the dynamics of circulation of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). The consequent CSF stasis in hydrocephalus interferes with cerebral and ventricular system development. Children and adults who sustain congenital or acquired brain injury typically experience a diffuse insult that impacts many areas of the brain. Development and recovery after such injuries reflects both restoration and reorganization of cognitive functions. Classic examples were already reported in literature. This suggests the presence of biological mechanisms associated with resilient adaptation of brain networks. We will settle a link between the notable modifications to neurophysiology secondary to hydrocephalus and the ability of neuronal tissue to reassume and reorganize its functions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 1%
Estonia 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 69 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 18%
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Student > Master 10 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Other 18 24%
Unknown 7 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 34%
Neuroscience 9 12%
Psychology 9 12%
Computer Science 6 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 8%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 9 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 30 October 2019.
All research outputs
#1,666,693
of 25,138,857 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#770
of 7,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,474
of 256,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#44
of 292 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,138,857 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,631 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 256,143 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 292 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.