The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 |
Two is More Than One: How to Combine Brain Stimulation Rehabilitative Training for Functional Recovery?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnsys.2015.00154 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Satoko Koganemaru, Hidenao Fukuyama, Tatsuya Mima |
| Abstract |
A number of studies have shown that non-invasive brain stimulation has an additional effect in combination with rehabilitative therapy to enhance functional recovery than either therapy alone. The combination enhances use-dependent plasticity induced by repetitive training. The neurophysiological mechanism of the effects of this combination is based on associative plasticity. However, these effects were not reported in all cases. We propose a list of possible strategies to achieve an effective association between rehabilitative training with brain stimulation for plasticity: (1) control of temporal aspect between stimulation and task execution; (2) the use of a shaped task for the combination; (3) the appropriate stimulation of neuronal circuits where use-dependent plastic changes occur; and (4) phase synchronization between rhythmically patterned brain stimulation and task-related patterned activities of neurons. To better utilize brain stimulation in neuro-rehabilitation, it is important to develop more effective techniques to combine them. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| Germany | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 68 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 17% |
| Unknown | 16 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 20 | 28% |
| Psychology | 8 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 22 | 31% |
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 24 April 2016.
All research outputs
#7,059,720
of 23,567,572 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#552
of 1,363 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,063
of 284,310 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#17
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,567,572 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,363 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 284,310 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 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 62% of its contemporaries.