↓ Skip to main content

Electrochemical properties of titanium nitride nerve stimulation electrodes: an in vitro and in vivo study

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
Electrochemical properties of titanium nitride nerve stimulation electrodes: an in vitro and in vivo study
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, August 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2015.00268
Pubmed ID
Authors

Suzan Meijs, Morten Fjorback, Carina Jensen, Søren Sørensen, Kristian Rechendorff, Nico J. M. Rijkhoff

Abstract

The in vivo electrochemical behavior of titanium nitride (TiN) nerve stimulation electrodes was compared to their in vitro behavior for a period of 90 days. Ten electrodes were implanted in two Göttingen minipigs. Four of these were used for electrical stimulation and electrochemical measurements. Five electrodes were kept in Ringer's solution at 37.5°C, of which four were used for electrical stimulation and electrochemical measurements. The voltage transients measured in vivo were 13 times greater than in vitro at implantation and they continued to increase with time. The electrochemical properties in vivo and the tissue resistance (Rtissue) followed a similar trend with time. There was no consistent significant difference between the electrochemical properties of the in vivo and in vitro electrodes after the implanted period. The differences between the in vivo and in vitro electrodes during the implanted period show that the evaluation of electrochemical performance of implantable stimulation electrodes cannot be substituted with in vitro measurements. After the implanted period, however, the performance of the in vivo and in vitro electrodes in saline was similar. In addition, the changes observed over time during the post-implantation period regarding the electrochemical properties of the in vivo electrodes and Rtissue were similar, which indicates that these changes are due to the foreign body response to implantation.

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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Finland 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 59 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 28%
Student > Master 9 15%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 10 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 28 46%
Materials Science 7 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 12 20%
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 04 August 2015.
All research outputs
#19,944,994
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8,669
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,741
of 275,998 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#70
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 275,998 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.