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 |
Diffusion tensor imaging and white matter abnormalities in patients with disorders of consciousness
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2014.01028 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carlo Cavaliere, Marco Aiello, Carol Di Perri, Davinia Fernandez-Espejo, Adrian M. Owen, Andrea Soddu |
| Abstract |
Progress in neuroimaging has yielded new powerful tools which, potentially, can be applied to clinical populations, improve the diagnosis of neurological disorders and predict outcome. At present, the diagnosis of consciousness disorders is limited to subjective assessment and objective measurements of behavior, with an emerging role for neuroimaging techniques. In this review we focus on white matter alterations measured using Diffusion Tensor Imaging on patients with consciousness disorders, examining the most common diffusion imaging acquisition protocols and considering the main issues related to diffusion imaging analyses. We conclude by considering some of the remaining challenges to overcome, the existing knowledge gaps and the potential role of neuroimaging in understanding the pathogenesis and clinical features of disorders of consciousness. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 70 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 19% |
| Researcher | 13 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 19% |
| Unknown | 9 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 16 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 18% |
| Neuroscience | 12 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 16 | 22% |
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 27 January 2015.
All research outputs
#17,738,777
of 22,780,165 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,703
of 7,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,502
of 352,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#150
of 184 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,780,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 352,338 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 184 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.