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 |
Top-down mechanisms of anesthetic-induced unconsciousness
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnsys.2014.00115 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
George A. Mashour |
| Abstract |
The question of how structurally and pharmacologically diverse general anesthetics disrupt consciousness has persisted since the nineteenth century. There has traditionally been a significant focus on "bottom-up" mechanisms of anesthetic action, in terms of sensory processing, arousal systems, and structural scales. However, recent evidence suggests that the neural mechanisms of anesthetic-induced unconsciousness may involve a "top-down" process, which parallels current perspectives on the neurobiology of conscious experience itself. This article considers various arguments for top-down mechanisms of anesthetic-induced unconsciousness, with a focus on sensory processing and sleep-wake networks. Furthermore, recent theoretical work is discussed to highlight the possibility that top-down explanations may be causally sufficient, even assuming critical bottom-up events. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | 1% |
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Serbia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 155 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 30 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 36 | 22% |
| Unknown | 30 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 35 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 22 | 13% |
| Psychology | 10 | 6% |
| Engineering | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 18 | 11% |
| Unknown | 39 | 24% |
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 28 August 2014.
All research outputs
#14,697,544
of 24,143,470 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#815
of 1,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,000
of 232,535 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#32
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,143,470 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 1,390 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 232,535 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.