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 |
Top-down and bottom-up modulation of pain-induced oscillations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00375 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael Hauck, Claudia Domnick, Jürgen Lorenz, Christian Gerloff, Andreas K. Engel |
| Abstract |
Attention is an important factor that is able to strongly modulate the experience of pain. In order to differentiate cortical mechanisms underlying subject-driven (i.e., top-down) and stimulus-driven (bottom-up) modes of attentional pain modulation, we recorded electric brain activity in healthy volunteers during painful laser stimulation while spatial attention and stimulus intensity were systematically varied. The subjects' task was to evaluate the pain intensity at the attended finger, while ignoring laser stimuli delivered to the other finger. Top-down (attention) and bottom up (intensity) influences differed in their effects on oscillatory response components. Attention towards pain induced a decrease in alpha and an increase in gamma band power, localized in the insula. Pain intensity modulated delta, alpha, beta and gamma band power. Source localization revealed stimulus driven modulation in the cingulate gyrus (CG) and somatosensory areas for gamma power changes. Our results indicate that bottom-up and top-down modes of processing exert different effects on pain-induced slow and fast oscillatory activities. Future studies may examine pain-induced oscillations using this paradigm to test for altered attentional pain control in patients with chronic pain. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 | 2 | 22% |
| Denmark | 1 | 11% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 11% |
| Australia | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 4 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 56% |
| Scientists | 4 | 44% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 140 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 32 | 22% |
| Researcher | 16 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 8% |
| Other | 31 | 21% |
| Unknown | 28 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 33 | 23% |
| Psychology | 19 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 5% |
| Engineering | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 20 | 14% |
| Unknown | 41 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 October 2015.
All research outputs
#5,582,118
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,271
of 7,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,042
of 263,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#49
of 160 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,148 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
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 263,464 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 160 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.