↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Clinical utility of brain stimulation modalities following traumatic brain injury: current evidence

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 Mendeley
Title
Clinical utility of brain stimulation modalities following traumatic brain injury: current evidence
Published in
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, June 2015
DOI 10.2147/ndt.s65816
Pubmed ID
Authors

Felipe Fregni, Shasha Li, Ana Zaninotto, Iuri Santana Neville, Wellingson Paiva, Danuza Nunn

Abstract

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains the main cause of disability and a major public health problem worldwide. This review focuses on the neurophysiology of TBI, and the rationale and current state of evidence of clinical application of brain stimulation to promote TBI recovery, particularly on consciousness, cognitive function, motor impairments, and psychiatric conditions. We discuss the mechanisms of different brain stimulation techniques including major noninvasive and invasive stimulations. Thus far, most noninvasive brain stimulation interventions have been nontargeted and focused on the chronic phase of recovery after TBI. In the acute stages, there is limited available evidence of the efficacy and safety of brain stimulation to improve functional outcomes. Comparing the studies across different techniques, transcranial direct current stimulation is the intervention that currently has the higher number of properly designed clinical trials, though total number is still small. We recognize the need for larger studies with target neuroplasticity modulation to fully explore the benefits of brain stimulation to effect TBI recovery during different stages of recovery.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 100 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 15%
Student > Master 15 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Other 25 24%
Unknown 14 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 25%
Neuroscience 23 22%
Psychology 12 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 18 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 March 2016.
All research outputs
#8,185,668
of 14,535,828 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#1,088
of 2,442 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,403
of 233,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#53
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,535,828 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,442 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 233,334 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 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.