↓ Skip to main content

Deficits in the Activation of Human Oculomotor Nuclei in Chronic Traumatic Brain Injury

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Deficits in the Activation of Human Oculomotor Nuclei in Chronic Traumatic Brain Injury
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, August 2015
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2015.00173
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher W. Tyler, Lora T. Likova, Kristyo N. Mineff, Spero C. Nicholas

Abstract

Binocular eye movements form a finely tuned system that requires accurate coordination of the oculomotor dynamics of the brainstem control nuclei when tracking the fine binocular disparities required for 3D vision. They are particularly susceptible to disruption by brain injury and other neural dysfunctions. Here, we report functional magnetic resonance imaging activation of the brainstem oculomotor control nuclei by binocular saccadic and vergence eye movements, and significant reductions in their response amplitudes in mild or diffuse traumatic brain injury (dTBI). Bilateral signals were recorded from a non-TBI control group (n = 11) in the oculomotor control system of the superior colliculi, the oculomotor nuclei, the abducens nuclei, and in the supra-oculomotor area (SOA), which mediate vergence eye movements. Signals from these nuclei were significantly reduced overall in a dTBI group (n = 12) and in particular for the SOA for vergence movements, which also showed significant decreases in velocity for both the convergence and divergence directions.

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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 49 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 16%
Other 5 10%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 13 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 20%
Neuroscience 9 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 15 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 September 2015.
All research outputs
#17,770,433
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#7,059
of 11,706 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,629
of 267,539 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#42
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,706 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 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 267,539 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.