↓ Skip to main content

Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation for the Treatment of Symptoms Following Traumatic Brain Injury

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
255 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
Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation for the Treatment of Symptoms Following Traumatic Brain Injury
Published in
Frontiers in Psychiatry, August 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2015.00119
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simarjot K. Dhaliwal, Benjamin P. Meek, Mandana M. Modirrousta

Abstract

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a common cause of physical, psychological, and cognitive impairment, but many current treatments for TBI are ineffective or produce adverse side effects. Non-invasive methods of brain stimulation could help ameliorate some common trauma-induced symptoms. This review summarizes instances in which repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) have been used to treat symptoms following a TBI. A subsequent discussion attempts to determine the value of these methods in light of their potential risks. The research databases of PubMed/MEDLINE and PsycINFO were electronically searched using terms relevant to the use of rTMS and tDCS as a tool to decrease symptoms in the context of rehabilitation post-TBI. Eight case-studies and four multi-subject reports using rTMS and six multi--subject studies using tDCS were found. Two instances of seizure are discussed. There is evidence that rTMS can be an effective treatment option for some post-TBI symptoms, such as depression, tinnitus, and neglect. Although the safety of this method remains uncertain, the use of rTMS in cases of mild TBI without obvious structural damage may be justified. Evidence on the effectiveness of tDCS is mixed, highlighting the need for additional investigations.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 255 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Unknown 251 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 37 15%
Student > Master 36 14%
Student > Bachelor 31 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 12%
Other 16 6%
Other 36 14%
Unknown 69 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 20%
Psychology 42 16%
Neuroscience 40 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 3%
Other 25 10%
Unknown 78 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 30 January 2016.
All research outputs
#13,211,650
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#3,804
of 9,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,714
of 267,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#19
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,950 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 267,563 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 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 52% of its contemporaries.