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 |
Proceedings of the first workshop on Peripheral Machine Interfaces: going beyond traditional surface electromyography
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neurorobotics, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnbot.2014.00022 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Claudio Castellini, Panagiotis Artemiadis, Michael Wininger, Arash Ajoudani, Merkur Alimusaj, Antonio Bicchi, Barbara Caputo, William Craelius, Strahinja Dosen, Kevin Englehart, Dario Farina, Arjan Gijsberts, Sasha B. Godfrey, Levi Hargrove, Mark Ison, Todd Kuiken, Marko Marković, Patrick M. Pilarski, Rüdiger Rupp, Erik Scheme |
| Abstract |
One of the hottest topics in rehabilitation robotics is that of proper control of prosthetic devices. Despite decades of research, the state of the art is dramatically behind the expectations. To shed light on this issue, in June, 2013 the first international workshop on Present and future of non-invasive peripheral nervous system (PNS)-Machine Interfaces (MI; PMI) was convened, hosted by the International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics. The keyword PMI has been selected to denote human-machine interfaces targeted at the limb-deficient, mainly upper-limb amputees, dealing with signals gathered from the PNS in a non-invasive way, that is, from the surface of the residuum. The workshop was intended to provide an overview of the state of the art and future perspectives of such interfaces; this paper represents is a collection of opinions expressed by each and every researcher/group involved in it. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 252 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 250 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 57 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 51 | 20% |
| Researcher | 29 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 4% |
| Other | 40 | 16% |
| Unknown | 42 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 119 | 47% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 19 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 13 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 3% |
| Other | 18 | 7% |
| Unknown | 51 | 20% |
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 27 May 2015.
All research outputs
#20,237,640
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurorobotics
#686
of 854 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,909
of 230,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurorobotics
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 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 854 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. 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 230,682 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 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them