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.
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.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Effects of neurofeedback and computer-assisted cognitive rehabilitation on relative brain wave ratios and activities of daily living of stroke patients: a randomized control trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Physical Therapy Science, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1589/jpts.28.2154 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hwi-Young Cho, Ki-Tae Kim, Jin-Hwa Jung |
| Abstract |
[Purpose] This study investigated the effects of neurofeedback (NFB) and computer-assisted cognitive rehabilitation (CACR) on the relative brain wave ratios and activities of daily living (ADL) of stroke patients. [Subjects and Methods] Forty-four participants were randomly allocated to the NFB (n=14), CACR (n=14), or control (CON) (n=16) groups. Two expert therapists provided the NFB, CACR, and CON groups with traditional rehabilitation therapy in 30-minute sessions, 5 times a week, for 6 weeks. NFB training was provided only to the NFB group and CACR training was provided only to the CACR group. The CON group received traditional rehabilitation therapy only. Before and after 6 weeks of intervention, brain wave and ADL evaluations were performed, and the results were analyzed. [Results] The relative ratio of beta waves, only showed a significant increase in the frontal and parietal areas of the NFB group. Significant changes in ADL were shown by all three groups after the intervention. However, there were no significant differences between the NFB and CACR groups and the CON group. [Conclusion] Our results suggest that CACR and NFB are effective at improving cognitive function and ADL of stroke patients. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 63 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 14% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 17% |
| Unknown | 16 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 15 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 14% |
| Psychology | 8 | 13% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 15 | 24% |
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 12 August 2016.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Physical Therapy Science
#1,292
of 1,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#298,469
of 380,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Physical Therapy Science
#48
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,731 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 380,298 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.