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 |
Influence of Corticospinal Tracts from Higher Order Motor Cortices on Recruitment Curve Properties in Stroke
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2016.00079 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kelsey A. Potter-Baker, Nicole M. Varnerin, David A. Cunningham, Sarah M. Roelle, Vishwanath Sankarasubramanian, Corin E. Bonnett, Andre G. Machado, Adriana B. Conforto, Ken Sakaie, Ela B. Plow |
| Abstract |
Recruitment curves (RCs) acquired using transcranial magnetic stimulation are commonly used in stroke to study physiologic functioning of corticospinal tracts (CST) from M1. However, it is unclear whether CSTs from higher motor cortices contribute as well. To explore whether integrity of CST from higher motor areas, besides M1, relates to CST functioning captured using RCs. RCs were acquired for a paretic hand muscle in patients with chronic stroke. Metrics describing gain and overall output of CST were collected. CST integrity was defined by diffusion tensor imaging. For CST emerging from M1 and higher motor areas, integrity (fractional anisotropy) was evaluated in the region of the posterior limb of the internal capsule, the length of CST and in the region of the stroke lesion. We found that output and gain of RC was related to integrity along the length of CST emerging from higher motor cortices but not the M1. Our results suggest that RC parameters in chronic stroke infer function primarily of CST descending from the higher motor areas but not M1. RCs may thus serve as a simple, in-expensive means to assess re-mapping of alternate areas that is generally studied with resource-intensive neuroimaging in stroke. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 90 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 12% |
| Researcher | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 19% |
| Unknown | 21 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 19 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 16% |
| Psychology | 7 | 8% |
| Engineering | 6 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 14% |
| Unknown | 26 | 29% |
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 13 June 2016.
All research outputs
#19,942,887
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8,668
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#217,492
of 313,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#120
of 166 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one 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 313,887 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 166 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.