The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 |
The Treatment Based on Temporal Information Processing Reduces Speech Comprehension Deficits in Aphasic Subjects
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnagi.2017.00098 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aneta Szymaszek, Tomasz Wolak, Elzbieta Szelag |
| Abstract |
Experimental studies have reported a close association between temporal information processing (TIP) and language comprehension. Brain-injured subjects with aphasia show disturbed TIP which was evidenced in elevated temporal order threshold (TOT) as compared to control subjects. The present study is aimed at improving auditory speech comprehension in aphasic subjects using a specific temporal treatment. Fourteen patients having deficits in both speech comprehension and TIP were tested. The Token Test, phoneme discrimination tests (PDT) and Voice-Onset-Time (VOT) Test were employed to assess speech comprehension. The TOT was measured using two 10 ms tones (400 Hz, 3000 Hz) presented binaurally. The patients participated in eight 45-min sessions of either the specific temporal treatment (n = 7) aimed at improving the perception of sequencing abilities, or in a non-temporal control treatment (n = 7) on volume discrimination. The temporal treatment yielded an improvement in TIP. Moreover, a transfer of improvement from the time domain to the language domain was observed. The control treatment did not improve either TIP or speech comprehension in any of the applied tests. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 124 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 34 | 27% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 13% |
| Unknown | 35 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 48 | 39% |
| Neuroscience | 11 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 9% |
| Unknown | 37 | 30% |
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 20 April 2017.
All research outputs
#18,542,806
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#4,074
of 4,833 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,928
of 310,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#111
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,833 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 310,118 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 121 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.