↓ Skip to main content

Lateralization of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy Based on Resting-State Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Machine Learning

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 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
Lateralization of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy Based on Resting-State Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Machine Learning
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, August 2015
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2015.00184
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhengyi Yang, Jeiran Choupan, David Reutens, Julia Hocking

Abstract

Lateralization of temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) is critical for successful outcome of surgery to relieve seizures. TLE affects brain regions beyond the temporal lobes and has been associated with aberrant brain networks, based on evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging. We present here a machine learning-based method for determining the laterality of TLE, using features extracted from resting-state functional connectivity of the brain. A comprehensive feature space was constructed to include network properties within local brain regions, between brain regions, and across the whole network. Feature selection was performed based on random forest and a support vector machine was employed to train a linear model to predict the laterality of TLE on unseen patients. A leave-one-patient-out cross validation was carried out on 12 patients and a prediction accuracy of 83% was achieved. The importance of selected features was analyzed to demonstrate the contribution of resting-state connectivity attributes at voxel, region, and network levels to TLE lateralization.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
Unknown 90 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 21%
Researcher 17 18%
Student > Master 12 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 4%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 22 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 21%
Neuroscience 11 12%
Psychology 7 8%
Engineering 6 7%
Computer Science 5 5%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 31 34%
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 18 September 2015.
All research outputs
#15,345,593
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#6,763
of 11,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,585
of 266,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#36
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,712 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 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 266,721 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.