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.
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 |
Effects of Cathode Location and the Size of Anode on Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Over the Leg Motor Area in Healthy Humans
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2018.00443 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Águida S. Foerster, Zeynab Rezaee, Walter Paulus, Michael A. Nitsche, Anirban Dutta |
| Abstract |
Objective: Non-invasive brain stimulation such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) involves passing low currents through the brain and is a promising tool for the modulation of cortical excitability. In this study, we investigated the effects of cathode location and the size of anode for anodal tDCS of the right-leg area of the motor cortex, which is challenging due to its depth and orientation in the inter-hemispheric fissure. Methods: We first computationally investigated the effects of cathode location and the size of the anode to find the best montage for specificity of stimulation effects for the targeted leg motor area using finite element analysis (FEA). We then compared the best electrode montage found from FEA with the conventional montage (contralateral supraorbital cathode) via neurophysiological testing of both, the targeted as well as the contralateral leg motor area. Results: The conventional anodal tDCS electrode montage for leg motor cortex stimulation using a large-anode (5 cm × 7 cm, current strength 2 mA) affected the contralateral side more strongly in both the FEA and the neurophysiological testing when compared to other electrode montages. A small-anode (3.5 cm × 1 cm at 0.2 mA) with the same current density at the electrode surface and identical contralateral supraorbital cathode placement improved specificity. The best cathode location for the small-anode in terms of specificity for anodal tDCS of the right-leg motor area was T7 (10-10 EEG system). Conclusion: A small-anode (3.5 cm × 1 cm) with the same current density at the electrode surface as a large-anode (5 cm × 7 cm) resulted in similar cortical excitability alterations of the targeted leg motor cortex respresentation. In relation to the other stimulation conditions, the small-anode montage with the cathode positioned at T7 resulted in the best specificity. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 63 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 17% |
| Unknown | 17 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 11 | 17% |
| Neuroscience | 11 | 17% |
| Psychology | 9 | 14% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 29% |
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 20 March 2022.
All research outputs
#14,920,631
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#6,088
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,941
of 341,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#143
of 235 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 341,350 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 235 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.