↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Dysesthesia symptoms produced by sensorimotor incongruence in healthy volunteers: an electroencephalogram study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
Title
Dysesthesia symptoms produced by sensorimotor incongruence in healthy volunteers: an electroencephalogram study
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, December 2016
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s122564
Pubmed ID
Authors

Osamu Katayama, Michihiro Osumi, Takayuki Kodama, Shu Morioka

Abstract

Pathological pain such as phantom limb pain is caused by sensorimotor incongruence. Several studies with healthy participants have clearly indicated that dysesthesia, which is similar to pathological pain, is caused by incongruence between proprioception and/or motor intention and visual feedback. It is not clear to what extent dysesthesia may be caused by incongruence between motor intention and visual feedback or by incongruence between proprioception and visual feedback. The aim of this study was to clarify the neurophysiology of these factors by analyzing electroencephalograms (EEGs). In total, 18 healthy participants were recruited for this study. Participants were asked to perform repetitive flexion/extension exercises with their elbows in a congruent/incongruent position while viewing the activity in a mirror. EEGs were performed to determine cortical activation during sensorimotor congruence and incongruence. In the high-frequency alpha band (10-12 Hz), numeric rating scale scores of a feeling of peculiarity were significantly correlated with event-related desynchronization/synchronization under the incongruence and proprioception conditions associated with motor intention and visual feedback (right inferior parietal region; r=-0.63, P<0.01) and between proprioception and visual feedback (right temporoparietal region; r=-0.49 and r=-0.50, P<0.05). In these brain regions, there was a region in which incongruence between proprioception and visual feedback and between motor intention and visual feedback caused an increase in activity. The present findings suggest that neural mechanisms of dysesthesia are caused by incongruence between proprioception associated with motor intention and visual feedback and, in particular, are a result of incongruence between proprioception only and visual feedback.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 17%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Other 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 13 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 7 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 17%
Neuroscience 7 17%
Psychology 3 7%
Sports and Recreations 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 14 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 February 2017.
All research outputs
#15,447,117
of 22,955,959 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#1,159
of 1,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,547
of 417,057 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#36
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,955,959 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,756 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 417,057 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.