↓ Skip to main content

μVEMP: A Portable Interface to Record Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials (VEMPs) With a Smart Phone or Tablet

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
μVEMP: A Portable Interface to Record Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials (VEMPs) With a Smart Phone or Tablet
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2018.00543
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hamish G. MacDougall, John Holden, Sally M. Rosengren, Elodie Chiarovano

Abstract

Background: Cervical VEMPs and ocular VEMPs are tests for evaluating otolith function in clinical practice. We developed a simple, portable and affordable device to record VEMP responses on patients, named μVEMP. Our aim was to validate and field test the new μVEMP device. Methods: We recorded cervical VEMPs and ocular VEMPs in response to bone conducted vibration using taps tendon hammer to the forehead (Fz) and to air conducted sounds using clicks. We simultaneously recorded VEMP responses (same subject, same electrode, same stimuli) in three healthy volunteers (2 females, age range: 29-57 years) with the μVEMP device and with a standard research grade commercial (CED) system used in clinics. We also used the μVEMP device to record VEMP responses from six patients (6 females, age mean±SD: 50.3 ± 20.8 years) with classical peripheral audio-vestibular diseases (unilateral vestibular neuritis, unilateral neurectomy, bilateral vestibular loss, unilateral superior canal dehiscence, unilateral otosclerosis). Results: The first part of this paper compared the devices using simultaneous recordings. The average of the concordance correlation coefficient was rc = 0.997 ± 0.003 showing a strong similarity between the measures. VEMP responses recorded with the μVEMP device on patients with audio-vestibular diseases were similar to those typically found in the literature. Conclusions: We developed, validated and field tested a new device to record ocular and cervical VEMPs in response to sound and vibration.This new device is portable (powered by a phone or tablet) with pocket-size dimensions (105 × 66 × 27 mm) and light weight (150 g). Although further studies and normative data are required, our μVEMP device is simpler (easier to use) and potentially more accessible than standard, commercially available equipment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 24%
Student > Master 5 17%
Other 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 7 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 31%
Neuroscience 4 14%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 9 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 28 July 2018.
All research outputs
#12,985,395
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#4,868
of 12,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,533
of 327,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#111
of 315 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,012 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 59% 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 327,552 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 315 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.