↓ Skip to main content

The variability of motor evoked potential latencies in neurosurgical motor mapping by preoperative navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neuroscience, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
The variability of motor evoked potential latencies in neurosurgical motor mapping by preoperative navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation
Published in
BMC Neuroscience, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12868-016-0321-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nico Sollmann, Lucia Bulubas, Noriko Tanigawa, Claus Zimmer, Bernhard Meyer, Sandro M. Krieg

Abstract

Recording of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) is used during navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) motor mapping to locate motor function in the human brain. However, factors potentially underlying MEP latency variability in neurosurgical motor mapping are vastly unknown. In the context of this study, one hundred brain tumor patients underwent preoperative nTMS-based motor mapping of the tumor hemisphere between 2010 and 2013. Fourteen predefined predictor variables were recorded, and MEP latencies of abductor pollicis brevis muscle (APB), abductor digiti minimi muscle (ADM), and flexor carpi radialis muscle (FCR) were analyzed using linear mixed-effect multiple regression analysis with the forward step-wise model comparison approach. Common factors (relevant to APB, ADM, and FCR) for MEP latency variability were gender, most likely due to body height, and antiepileptic drug (AED) intake. Muscle-specific factors (relevant to APB, ADM, or FCR) for MEP latency variability were resting motor threshold (rMT), tumor side, and tumor location. Based on a large cohort of neurosurgical patients, this study provides data on a wide range of clinical factors that may underlie MEP latency variability. The factors that significantly contributed to MEP latency variability should be standardly recorded and taken into consideration during neurosurgical motor mapping.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 47 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 17%
Student > Postgraduate 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Master 4 8%
Other 9 19%
Unknown 10 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 40%
Neuroscience 9 19%
Psychology 3 6%
Unspecified 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 13 27%
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 04 January 2017.
All research outputs
#20,376,559
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neuroscience
#1,057
of 1,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#355,981
of 421,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neuroscience
#17
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 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 1,248 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. 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 421,214 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 36 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.