↓ Skip to main content

Sex and Electrode Configuration in Transcranial Electrical Stimulation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
Sex and Electrode Configuration in Transcranial Electrical Stimulation
Published in
Frontiers in Psychiatry, August 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00147
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael J. Russell, Theodore A. Goodman, Joseph M. Visse, Laurel Beckett, Naomi Saito, Bruce G. Lyeth, Gregg H. Recanzone

Abstract

Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) can be an effective non-invasive neuromodulation procedure. Unfortunately, the considerable variation in reported treatment outcomes, both within and between studies, has made the procedure unreliable for many applications. To determine if individual differences in cranium morphology and tissue conductivity can account for some of this variation, the electrical density at two cortical locations (temporal and frontal) directly under scalp electrodes was modeled using a validated MRI modeling procedure in 23 subjects (12 males and 11 females). Three different electrode configurations (non-cephalic, bi-cranial, and ring) commonly used in tES were modeled at three current intensities (0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 mA). The aims were to assess the effects of configuration and current intensity on relative current received at a cortical brain target directly under the stimulating electrode and to characterize individual variation. The different electrode configurations resulted in up to a ninefold difference in mean current densities delivered to the brains. The ring configuration delivered the least current and the non-cephalic the most. Female subjects showed much less current to the brain than male subjects. Individual differences in the current received and differences in electrode configurations may account for significant variability in current delivered and, thus, potentially a significant portion of reported variation in clinical outcomes at two commonly targeted regions of the brain.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 14%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Master 6 12%
Other 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 12 24%
Unknown 10 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 16%
Neuroscience 7 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 10%
Unspecified 4 8%
Engineering 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 16 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 05 September 2017.
All research outputs
#6,814,891
of 25,081,285 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#3,169
of 12,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,295
of 323,097 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#36
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,081,285 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,256 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 323,097 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 78 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.