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 |
EEG-based local brain activity feedback training—tomographic neurofeedback
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2014.01005 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Herbert Bauer, Avni Pllana |
| Abstract |
Along with the development of distributed EEG source modeling methods, basic approaches to local brain activity (LBA-) neurofeedback (NF) have been suggested. Meanwhile several attempts using LORETA and sLORETA have been published. This article specifically reports on "EEG-based LBA-feedback training" developed by Bauer et al. (2011). Local brain activity-feedback has the advantage over other sLORETA-based approaches in the way that feedback is exclusively controlled by EEG-generating sources within a selected cortical region of training (ROT): feedback is suspended if there is no source. In this way the influence of sources in the vicinity of the ROT is excluded. First applications have yielded promising results: aiming to enhance activity in left hemispheric linguistic areas, five experimental subjects increased significantly the feedback rate whereas five controls receiving sham feedback did not, both after 13 training runs (U-test, p < 0.01). Preliminary results of another study that aims to document effects of LBA-feedback training of the Anterior Cingulate Cortex (ACC) and Dorso-Lateral Prefrontal Cortex (DLPFC) by fMRI revealed more local ACC-activity after successful training (Radke et al., 2014). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| China | 2 | 2% |
| Russia | 2 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 93 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 17% |
| Researcher | 15 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 10% |
| Unknown | 11 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 35 | 35% |
| Neuroscience | 24 | 24% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Unknown | 17 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 20 January 2015.
All research outputs
#13,420,341
of 22,778,347 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,068
of 7,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,258
of 356,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#114
of 183 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,778,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,142 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 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 356,577 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 183 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.