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 |
BEAPP: The Batch Electroencephalography Automated Processing Platform
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2018.00513 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
April R. Levin, Adriana S. Méndez Leal, Laurel J. Gabard-Durnam, Heather M. O’Leary |
| Abstract |
Electroencephalography (EEG) offers information about brain function relevant to a variety of neurologic and neuropsychiatric disorders. EEG contains complex, high-temporal-resolution information, and computational assessment maximizes our potential to glean insight from this information. Here we present the Batch EEG Automated Processing Platform (BEAPP), an automated, flexible EEG processing platform incorporating freely available software tools for batch processing of multiple EEG files across multiple processing steps. BEAPP does not prescribe a specified EEG processing pipeline; instead, it allows users to choose from a menu of options for EEG processing, including steps to manage EEG files collected across multiple acquisition setups (e.g., for multisite studies), minimize artifact, segment continuous and/or event-related EEG, and perform basic analyses. Overall, BEAPP aims to streamline batch EEG processing, improve accessibility to computational EEG assessment, and increase reproducibility of results. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 | 8 | 53% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 73% |
| Scientists | 3 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 111 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 26 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 12% |
| Unknown | 23 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 22 | 20% |
| Neuroscience | 20 | 18% |
| Engineering | 12 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 14 | 13% |
| Unknown | 34 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 11 January 2019.
All research outputs
#3,375,404
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#2,670
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,107
of 340,782 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#77
of 235 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 11.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 340,782 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 235 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 67% of its contemporaries.