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 |
The olivocochlear system and protection from acoustic trauma: a mini literature review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnsys.2015.00094 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Adrian Fuente |
| Abstract |
Large intersubject variability in the susceptibility to noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) is known to occur in both humans and animals. It has been suggested that the olivocochlear system (OCS) plays a significant role in protecting the cochlea from exposure to high levels of noise. A mini literature review about the scientific evidence from animal and human studies about the association between the function of the OCS and susceptibility to NIHL was carried out. Animal data consistently show that de-efferented ears exhibit larger temporary threshold shift (TTS) and permanent threshold shift (PTS) than efferented ears. Data from human studies do not consistently show a correlation between the strength of the OCS function and amount of TTS. Further research on human subjects is required to determine how the OCS function could be used to predict susceptibility to NIHL in individual subjects. |
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% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 54 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 14% |
| Researcher | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 11 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 12 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 9% |
| Engineering | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 14 | 25% |
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 01 September 2015.
All research outputs
#14,813,552
of 22,808,725 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#887
of 1,342 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,009
of 263,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#22
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,808,725 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,342 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 263,859 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.