Olivier Darbin, Coral Gubler, Dean Naritoku, Daniel Dees, Anthony Martino, Elizabeth Adams
Abstract
This study describes a cost-effective screening protocol for parkinsonism based on combined objective and subjective monitoring of balance function. Objective evaluation of balance function was performed using a game industry balance board and an automated analyses of the dynamic of the center of pressure in time, frequency, and non-linear domains collected during short series of stand up tests with different modalities and severity of sensorial deprivation. The subjective measurement of balance function was performed using the Dizziness Handicap Inventory questionnaire. Principal component analyses on both objective and subjective measurements of balance function allowed to obtained a specificity and selectivity for parkinsonian patients (vs. healthy subjects) of 0.67 and 0.71 respectively. The findings are discussed regarding the relevance of cost-effective balance-based screening system as strategy to meet the needs of broader and earlier screening for parkinsonism in communities with limited access to healthcare.
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 08 October 2016.
All research outputs
#14,269,286
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,587
of 7,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,392
of 336,891 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#86
of 147 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,171 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 336,891 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 147 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.
