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.
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 |
An Objective Estimation of Air-Bone-Gap in Cochlear Implant Recipients with Residual Hearing Using Electrocochleography
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2017.00210 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kanthaiah Koka, Aniket A. Saoji, Joseph Attias, Leonid M. Litvak |
| Abstract |
Although, cochlear implants (CI) traditionally have been used to treat individuals with bilateral profound sensorineural hearing loss, a recent trend is to implant individuals with residual low-frequency hearing. Notably, many of these individuals demonstrate an air-bone gap (ABG) in low-frequency, pure-tone thresholds following implantation. An ABG is the difference between audiometric thresholds measured using air conduction (AC) and bone conduction (BC) stimulation. Although, behavioral AC thresholds are straightforward to assess, BC thresholds can be difficult to measure in individuals with severe-to-profound hearing loss because of vibrotactile responses to high-level, low-frequency stimulation and the potential contribution of hearing in the contralateral ear. Because of these technical barriers to measuring behavioral BC thresholds in implanted patients with residual hearing, it would be helpful to have an objective method for determining ABG. This study evaluated an innovative technique for measuring electrocochleographic (ECochG) responses using the cochlear microphonic (CM) response to assess AC and BC thresholds in implanted patients with residual hearing. Results showed high correlations between CM thresholds and behavioral audiograms for AC and BC conditions, thereby demonstrating the feasibility of using ECochG as an objective tool for quantifying ABG in CI recipients. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 33 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 12% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 27% |
| Unknown | 6 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 27% |
| Engineering | 5 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 12% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 30% |
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 22 April 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#10,138
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,672
of 323,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#188
of 210 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 323,928 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 210 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.