↓ Skip to main content

Functional Imaging of Autonomic Regulation: Methods and Key Findings

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
164 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
Functional Imaging of Autonomic Regulation: Methods and Key Findings
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2015.00513
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul M. Macey, Jennifer A. Ogren, Rajesh Kumar, Ronald M. Harper

Abstract

Central nervous system processing of autonomic function involves a network of regions throughout the brain which can be visualized and measured with neuroimaging techniques, notably functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The development of fMRI procedures has both confirmed and extended earlier findings from animal models, and human stroke and lesion studies. Assessments with fMRI can elucidate interactions between different central sites in regulating normal autonomic patterning, and demonstrate how disturbed systems can interact to produce aberrant regulation during autonomic challenges. Understanding autonomic dysfunction in various illnesses reveals mechanisms that potentially lead to interventions in the impairments. The objectives here are to: (1) describe the fMRI neuroimaging methodology for assessment of autonomic neural control, (2) outline the widespread, lateralized distribution of function in autonomic sites in the normal brain which includes structures from the neocortex through the medulla and cerebellum, (3) illustrate the importance of the time course of neural changes when coordinating responses, and how those patterns are impacted in conditions of sleep-disordered breathing, and (4) highlight opportunities for future research studies with emerging methodologies. Methodological considerations specific to autonomic testing include timing of challenges relative to the underlying fMRI signal, spatial resolution sufficient to identify autonomic brainstem nuclei, blood pressure, and blood oxygenation influences on the fMRI signal, and the sustained timing, often measured in minutes of challenge periods and recovery. Key findings include the lateralized nature of autonomic organization, which is reminiscent of asymmetric motor, sensory, and language pathways. Testing brain function during autonomic challenges demonstrate closely-integrated timing of responses in connected brain areas during autonomic challenges, and the involvement with brain regions mediating postural and motoric actions, including respiration, and cardiac output. The study of pathological processes associated with autonomic disruption shows susceptibilities of different brain structures to altered timing of neural function, notably in sleep disordered breathing, such as obstructive sleep apnea and congenital central hypoventilation syndrome. The cerebellum, in particular, serves coordination roles for vestibular stimuli and blood pressure changes, and shows both injury and substantially altered timing of responses to pressor challenges in sleep-disordered breathing conditions. The insights into central autonomic processing provided by neuroimaging have assisted understanding of such regulation, and may lead to new treatment options for conditions with disrupted autonomic function.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 161 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 17%
Researcher 23 14%
Student > Master 16 10%
Student > Bachelor 14 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 5%
Other 33 20%
Unknown 41 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 22%
Neuroscience 31 19%
Engineering 15 9%
Psychology 8 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Other 24 15%
Unknown 43 26%
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 01 August 2019.
All research outputs
#14,388,865
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#5,640
of 11,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,822
of 405,873 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#80
of 169 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 11,541 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 405,873 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 169 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.