The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Mechanisms of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Treating on Post-stroke Depression
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00215 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiaoqin Duan, Gang Yao, Zhongliang Liu, Ranji Cui, Wei Yang |
| Abstract |
Post-stroke depression (PSD) is a neuropsychiatric affective disorder that can develop after stroke. Patients with PSD show poorer functional and recovery outcomes than patients with stroke who do not suffer from depression. The risk of suicide is also higher in patients with PSD. PSD appears to be associated with complex pathophysiological mechanisms involving both psychological and psychiatric problems that are associated with functional deficits and neurochemical changes secondary to brain damage. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non-invasive way to investigate cortical excitability via magnetic stimulation of the brain. TMS is currently a valuable tool that can help us understand the pathophysiology of PSD. Although repetitive TMS (rTMS) is an effective treatment for patients with PSD, its mechanism of action remains unknown. Here, we review the known mechanisms underlying rTMS as a tool for better understanding PSD pathophysiology. It should be helpful when considering using rTMS as a therapeutic strategy for PSD. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 29% |
| Canada | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 57% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 43% |
| Scientists | 3 | 43% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 78 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 10% |
| Researcher | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 12 | 15% |
| Unknown | 23 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 14 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 15% |
| Psychology | 11 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 17% |
| Unknown | 24 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 06 August 2021.
All research outputs
#1,749,038
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#857
of 7,200 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,839
of 331,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#11
of 138 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,200 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 331,022 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 138 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.