↓ Skip to main content

Machine Learning Based Classification of Deep Brain Stimulation Outcomes in a Rat Model of Binge Eating Using Ventral Striatal Oscillations

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
Machine Learning Based Classification of Deep Brain Stimulation Outcomes in a Rat Model of Binge Eating Using Ventral Striatal Oscillations
Published in
Frontiers in Psychiatry, August 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00336
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wilder T. Doucette, Lucas Dwiel, Jared E. Boyce, Amanda A. Simon, Jibran Y. Khokhar, Alan I. Green

Abstract

Neuromodulation-based interventions continue to be evaluated across an array of appetitive disorders but broader implementation of these approaches remains limited due to variable treatment outcomes. We hypothesize that individual variation in treatment outcomes may be linked to differences in the networks underlying these disorders. Here, Sprague-Dawley rats received deep brain stimulation separately within each nucleus accumbens (NAc) sub-region (core and shell) using a within-animal crossover design in a rat model of binge eating. Significant reductions in binge size were observed with stimulation of either target but with significant variation in effectiveness across individuals. When features of local field potentials (LFPs) recorded from the NAc were used to classify the pre-defined stimulation outcomes (response or non-response) from each rat using a machine-learning approach (lasso), stimulation outcomes could be classified with greater accuracy than expected by chance (effect sizes: core = 1.13, shell = 1.05). Further, these LFP features could be used to identify the best stimulation target for each animal (core vs. shell) with an effect size = 0.96. These data suggest that individual differences in underlying network activity may relate to the variable outcomes of circuit based interventions, and measures of network activity could have the potential to individually guide the selection of an optimal stimulation target to improve overall treatment response rates.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 20%
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 11%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 11 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 18%
Neuroscience 6 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 9%
Engineering 3 7%
Computer Science 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 15 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 21 August 2018.
All research outputs
#5,133,226
of 25,155,561 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#2,712
of 12,356 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,051
of 337,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#77
of 165 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,155,561 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,356 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 done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 337,017 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 165 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 53% of its contemporaries.