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 |
Successful tactile based visual sensory substitution use functions independently of visual pathway integrity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00291 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vincent K. Lee, Amy C. Nau, Charles Laymon, Kevin C. Chan, Bedda L. Rosario, Chris Fisher |
| Abstract |
Neuronal reorganization after blindness is of critical interest because it has implications for the rational prescription of artificial vision devices. The purpose of this study was to distinguish the microstructural differences between perinatally blind (PB), acquired blind (AB), and normally sighted controls (SCs) and relate these differences to performance on functional tasks using a sensory substitution device (BrainPort). |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 67 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 16% |
| Researcher | 11 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 19% |
| Unknown | 7 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 14 | 20% |
| Psychology | 12 | 17% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 13% |
| Engineering | 8 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 10% |
| Other | 11 | 16% |
| Unknown | 9 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 25 July 2018.
All research outputs
#14,120,688
of 24,143,470 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,981
of 7,424 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,019
of 231,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#159
of 236 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,143,470 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,424 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 231,163 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 236 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.