↓ Skip to main content

Study on the Relationships between Intrinsic Functional Connectivity of the Default Mode Network and Transient Epileptic Activity

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 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
Study on the Relationships between Intrinsic Functional Connectivity of the Default Mode Network and Transient Epileptic Activity
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2014.00201
Pubmed ID
Authors

Renaud Lopes, Friederike Moeller, Pierre Besson, François Ogez, William Szurhaj, Xavier Leclerc, Michael Siniatchkin, Mathilde Chipaux, Philippe Derambure, Louise Tyvaert

Abstract

Simultaneous recording of electroencephalogram and functional MRI (EEG-fMRI) is a powerful tool for localizing epileptic networks via the detection of hemodynamic changes correlated with interictal epileptic discharges (IEDs). fMRI can be used to study the long-lasting effect of epileptic activity by assessing stationary functional connectivity during the resting-state period [especially, the connectivity of the default mode network (DMN)]. Temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) and idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE) are associated with low responsiveness and disruption of DMN activity. A dynamic functional connectivity approach might enable us to determine the effect of IEDs on DMN connectivity and to better understand the correlation between DMN connectivity changes and altered consciousness.

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 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 110 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 22%
Researcher 17 15%
Student > Master 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 10%
Other 7 6%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 22 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 30 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 8%
Engineering 7 6%
Psychology 5 4%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 29 26%
Attention Score in Context

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 27 November 2016.
All research outputs
#14,786,597
of 22,765,347 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#6,080
of 11,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,151
of 255,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#38
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,765,347 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 11,665 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 255,616 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.