↓ Skip to main content

Non-invasive Vagus Nerve Stimulation in Healthy Humans Reduces Sympathetic Nerve Activity

Overview of attention for article published in Brain Stimulation, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#34 of 2,197)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
15 X users
patent
5 patents
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
352 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
608 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
Non-invasive Vagus Nerve Stimulation in Healthy Humans Reduces Sympathetic Nerve Activity
Published in
Brain Stimulation, July 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.brs.2014.07.031
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer A. Clancy, David A. Mary, Klaus K. Witte, John P. Greenwood, Susan A. Deuchars, Jim Deuchars

Abstract

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is currently used to treat refractory epilepsy and is being investigated as a potential therapy for a range of conditions, including heart failure, tinnitus, obesity and Alzheimer's disease. However, the invasive nature and expense limits the use of VNS in patient populations and hinders the exploration of the mechanisms involved.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 608 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 <1%
Germany 3 <1%
France 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 594 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 87 14%
Student > Master 86 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 72 12%
Student > Bachelor 69 11%
Other 35 6%
Other 107 18%
Unknown 152 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 135 22%
Neuroscience 76 13%
Psychology 62 10%
Engineering 42 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 5%
Other 80 13%
Unknown 181 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 106. 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 24 October 2023.
All research outputs
#405,243
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Brain Stimulation
#34
of 2,197 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,483
of 245,751 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Stimulation
#1
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,197 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 245,751 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.