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 |
Modulation of cortical-subcortical networks in Parkinson’s disease by applied field effects
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00565 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christopher W. Hess |
| Abstract |
Studies suggest that endogenous field effects may play a role in neuronal oscillations and communication. Non-invasive transcranial electrical stimulation with low-intensity currents can also have direct effects on the underlying cortex as well as distant network effects. While Parkinson's disease (PD) is amenable to invasive neuromodulation in the basal ganglia by deep brain stimulation (DBS), techniques of non-invasive neuromodulation like transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) are being investigated as possible therapies. tDCS and tACS have the potential to influence the abnormal cortical-subcortical network activity that occurs in PD through sub-threshold changes in cortical excitability or through entrainment or disruption of ongoing rhythmic cortical activity. This may allow for the targeting of specific features of the disease involving abnormal oscillatory activity, as well as the enhancement of potential cortical compensation for basal ganglia dysfunction and modulation of cortical plasticity in neurorehabilitation. However, little is currently known about how cortical stimulation will affect subcortical structures, the size of any effect, and the factors of stimulation that will influence these effects. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 99 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 20 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 21 | 20% |
| Unknown | 19 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 24% |
| Psychology | 16 | 15% |
| Neuroscience | 14 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 8% |
| Engineering | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 12% |
| Unknown | 21 | 20% |
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 14 September 2013.
All research outputs
#18,347,414
of 22,721,584 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,051
of 7,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,062
of 280,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#764
of 862 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,721,584 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 7,130 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 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 280,761 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.