↓ Skip to main content

Robot-assisted surgery: an emerging platform for human neuroscience research

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
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.
Title
Robot-assisted surgery: an emerging platform for human neuroscience research
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00315
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anthony M. Jarc, Ilana Nisky

Abstract

Classic studies in human sensorimotor control use simplified tasks to uncover fundamental control strategies employed by the nervous system. Such simple tasks are critical for isolating specific features of motor, sensory, or cognitive processes, and for inferring causality between these features and observed behavioral changes. However, it remains unclear how these theories translate to complex sensorimotor tasks or to natural behaviors. Part of the difficulty in performing such experiments has been the lack of appropriate tools for measuring complex motor skills in real-world contexts. Robot-assisted surgery (RAS) provides an opportunity to overcome these challenges by enabling unobtrusive measurements of user behavior. In addition, a continuum of tasks with varying complexity-from simple tasks such as those in classic studies to highly complex tasks such as a surgical procedure-can be studied using RAS platforms. Finally, RAS includes a diverse participant population of inexperienced users all the way to expert surgeons. In this perspective, we illustrate how the characteristics of RAS systems make them compelling platforms to extend many theories in human neuroscience, as well as, to develop new theories altogether.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 78 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 25%
Student > Master 14 18%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 15 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 39 49%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 11%
Computer Science 5 6%
Sports and Recreations 3 4%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 15 19%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 July 2015.
All research outputs
#19,015,492
of 23,567,572 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,189
of 7,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,541
of 268,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#168
of 191 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,567,572 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 7,319 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 268,423 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 191 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.