| Title |
Altered intrinsic brain activities in patients with acute eye pain using amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation: a resting-state fMRI study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ndt.s150051 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhi-Ming Pan, Hai-Jun Li, Jing Bao, Nan Jiang, Qing Yuan, Shelby Freeberg, Pei-Wen Zhu, Lei Ye, Ming-Yang Ma, Xin Huang, Yi Shao |
| Abstract |
Many previous studies have reported that pain symptoms can lead to significant brain function and anatomical changes, whereas the intrinsic brain activity changes in acute eye pain (EP) patients remain unknown. Using the amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation (ALFF) method, this study aimed to evaluate the spontaneous brain activity alterations and their relationships with clinical features in acute EP patients. A total of 20 patients with EP (15 males and 5 females) and 20 healthy controls (HCs; 15 males and 5 females) closely matched in age, sex, and education underwent resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging scans. The ALFF method was applied to assess spontaneous brain activity changes. The ALFF values of the EP patients were distinguished from those of the HCs using a receiver operating characteristic curve. Pearson's correlation analysis was used to investigate the relationships between the mean ALFF signal values from many brain regions and the clinical features in EP patients. Compared with the HCs, acute EP patients had significantly lower ALFF in the left and right precentral/postcentral gyrus and left precuneus. In contrast, acute EP patients showed higher ALFF values in the right and left parahippocampal gyri and left caudate. However, no relationship was observed between the mean ALFF signal values from the different areas and clinical manifestations in the acute EP patients. We demonstrated that acute EP patients showed abnormal intrinsic brain activities in the precentral/postcentral gyrus and limbic system, which might provide useful information for explaining neural mechanisms in EP patients. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 19% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 24% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 14% |
| Psychology | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
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 11 January 2018.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#2,583
of 3,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#389,382
of 449,550 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#61
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,131 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 449,550 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.