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 |
Recent Advances in Non-invasive Brain Stimulation for Major Depressive Disorder
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00526 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shui Liu, Jiyao Sheng, Bingjin Li, Xuewen Zhang |
| Abstract |
Non-invasive brain stimulation (NBS) is a promising treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD), which is an affective processing disorder involving abnormal emotional processing. Many studies have shown that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the prefrontal cortex can play a regulatory role in affective processing. Although the clinical efficacy of NBS in MDD has been demonstrated clinically, the precise mechanism of action remains unclear. Therefore, this review article summarizes the current status of NBS methods, including rTMS and tDCS, in the treatment of MDD. The article explores possible correlations between depressive symptoms and affective processing, highlighting the relevant affective processing mechanisms. Our review provides a reference for the safety and efficacy of NBS methods in the clinical treatment of MDD. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 110 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 13% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 14 | 13% |
| Unknown | 29 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 24 | 22% |
| Psychology | 14 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 5% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 14% |
| Unknown | 36 | 33% |
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 06 April 2023.
All research outputs
#13,148,389
of 23,532,144 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,550
of 7,311 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,048
of 332,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#89
of 157 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,532,144 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,311 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 332,060 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 157 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.