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 |
Effects of alternating current stimulation on the healthy and diseased brain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2015.00391 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aini Ismafairus Abd Hamid, Carolin Gall, Oliver Speck, Andrea Antal, Bernhard A. Sabel |
| Abstract |
Cognitive and neurological dysfunctions can severely impact a patient's daily activities. In addition to medical treatment, non-invasive transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) has been proposed as a therapeutic technique to improve the functional state of the brain. Although during the last years tACS was applied in numerous studies to improve motor, somatosensory, visual and higher order cognitive functions, our knowledge is still limited regarding the mechanisms as to which type of ACS can affect cortical functions and altered neuronal oscillations seem to be the key mechanism. Because alternating current send pulses to the brain at predetermined frequencies, the online- and after-effects of ACS strongly depend on the stimulation parameters so that "optimal" ACS paradigms could be achieved. This is of interest not only for neuroscience research but also for clinical practice. In this study, we summarize recent findings on ACS-effects under both normal conditions and in brain diseases. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
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 154 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 152 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 31 | 20% |
| Researcher | 21 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 22 | 14% |
| Unknown | 33 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 29 | 19% |
| Neuroscience | 27 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 9% |
| Engineering | 14 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 10% |
| Unknown | 50 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 November 2015.
All research outputs
#15,169,543
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#6,400
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,839
of 295,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#75
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 295,221 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.