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.
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.
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 |
Theoretical Analysis of Transcranial Magneto-Acoustical Stimulation with Hodgkin-Huxley Neuron Model
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fncom.2016.00035 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yi Yuan, Yudong Chen, Xiaoli Li |
| Abstract |
Transcranial magneto-acoustical stimulation (TMAS) is a novel stimulation technology in which an ultrasonic wave within a magnetostatic field generates an electric current in an area of interest in the brain to modulate neuronal activities. As a key part of the neural network, neurons transmit information in the nervous system. However, the effect of TMAS on the neuronal firing pattern remains unknown. To address this problem, we investigated the stimulatory mechanism of TMAS on neurons, by using a Hodgkin-Huxley neuron model. The simulation results indicated that the magnetostatic field intensity and ultrasonic power affect the amplitude and interspike interval of neuronal action potential under a continuous wave ultrasound. The simulation results also showed that the ultrasonic power, duty cycle and repetition frequency can alter the firing pattern of neural action potential under pulsed wave ultrasound. This study may help to reveal and explain the biological mechanism of TMAS and to provide a theoretical basis for TMAS in the treatment or rehabilitation of neuropsychiatric disorders. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 51 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 15% |
| Researcher | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 12% |
| Professor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 10 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 13 | 25% |
| Neuroscience | 7 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 13% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 14 | 27% |
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 20 April 2016.
All research outputs
#15,317,111
of 22,862,742 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#853
of 1,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,817
of 299,207 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#24
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,862,742 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 1,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 299,207 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.