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 |
Differential auditory-oculomotor interactions in patients with right vs. left sided subjective tinnitus: a saccade study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00047 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alexandre Lang, Marine Vernet, Qing Yang, Christophe Orssaud, Alain Londero, Zoï Kapoula |
| Abstract |
Subjective tinnitus (ST) is a frequent but poorly understood medical condition. Recent studies demonstrated abnormalities in several types of eye movements (smooth pursuit, optokinetic nystagmus, fixation, and vergence) in ST patients. The present study investigates horizontal and vertical saccades in patients with tinnitus lateralized predominantly to the left or to the right side. Compared to left sided ST, tinnitus perceived on the right side impaired almost all the parameters of saccades (latency, amplitude, velocity, etc.) and noticeably the upward saccades. Relative to controls, saccades from both groups were more dysmetric and were characterized by increased saccade disconjugacy (i.e., poor binocular coordination). Although the precise mechanisms linking ST and saccadic control remain unexplained, these data suggest that ST can lead to detrimental auditory, visuomotor, and perhaps vestibular interactions. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Belgium | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 23 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 16% |
| Researcher | 3 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 12% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 16% |
| Unknown | 5 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 20% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 12% |
| Engineering | 3 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Psychology | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 16% |
| Unknown | 6 | 24% |
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 26 February 2013.
All research outputs
#20,184,694
of 22,699,621 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,524
of 7,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,720
of 280,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#818
of 862 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,699,621 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,125 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 280,695 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 862 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.