↓ Skip to main content

Endogenous plasticity in neuro-rehabilitation following partial spinal cord lesions

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
Endogenous plasticity in neuro-rehabilitation following partial spinal cord lesions
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, April 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2014.00059
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bror Alstermark, Lars-Gunnar Pettersson

Abstract

Currently, much interest in neuro-rehabilitation is focused on mechanisms related to axonal outgrowth and formation of new circuits although still little is known about the functionality in motor behavior. This is a highly exciting avenue of research and most important to consider when dealing with large lesions. Here, we address endogenous mechanisms with the potential of modifying the function of already existing spinal circuits via associative plasticity. We forward a hypothesis based on experimental findings suggesting that potentiation of synaptic transmission in un-injured pathways can be monitored and adjusted by a Cerebellar loop involving the Reticulospinal, Rubrospinal and Corticospinal tracts and spinal interneurons with projection to motoneurons. This mechanism could be of relevance when lesions are less extensive and the integrity of the neural circuits remains in part. Endogenous plasticity in the spinal cord could be of clinical importance if stimulated in an adequate manner, e.g., by using optimal training protocols.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 22%
Student > Bachelor 3 17%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Professor 2 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 11%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 3 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 5 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Engineering 2 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 30 April 2014.
All research outputs
#14,387,227
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#5,643
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,400
of 241,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#32
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. 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 241,185 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 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 52% of its contemporaries.