↓ Skip to main content

Refixation Saccades with Normal Gain Values: A Diagnostic Problem in the Video Head Impulse Test: A Case Report

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Refixation Saccades with Normal Gain Values: A Diagnostic Problem in the Video Head Impulse Test: A Case Report
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2017.00081
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leise Elisabeth Hviid Korsager, Christian Emil Faber, Jesper Hvass Schmidt, Jens Højberg Wanscher

Abstract

Refixation saccades with normal gain value occur more frequently with increasing age. The phenomenon has also been observed in different vestibular disorders. In this case, we present a young male with normal gain value and refixation saccades tested with the video head impulse test (vHIT) the day after his cochlear implantation. One month after surgery, refixation saccades were no longer present. This suggests that refixation saccades can occur as a result of temporary pathology such as surgery. Refixation saccades with normal gain values might reflect a partial deficit in the vestibulo-ocular reflex. However, this partial deficit is in conflict with the current way of interpreting vHIT results in which the vestibular function is classified as either normal or pathological based only on the gain value. Refixation saccades, which are evident signs of vestibulopathy, are not considered in the evaluation. A new way of interpreting the vHIT based on the saccades must be considered.

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 profile of 1 X user 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 17%
Other 7 15%
Student > Master 7 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 8 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 15%
Neuroscience 5 11%
Engineering 2 4%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 10 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 16 April 2019.
All research outputs
#4,106,392
of 22,959,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#3,387
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,801
of 307,966 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#35
of 148 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,959,818 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 307,966 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 148 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.