↓ Skip to main content

Asking New Questions with Old Data: The Centralized Open-Access Rehabilitation Database for Stroke

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 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
Asking New Questions with Old Data: The Centralized Open-Access Rehabilitation Database for Stroke
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, September 2016
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2016.00153
Pubmed ID
Authors

Keith R. Lohse, Sydney Y. Schaefer, Adam C. Raikes, Lara A. Boyd, Catherine E. Lang

Abstract

This paper introduces a tool for streamlining data integration in rehabilitation science, the Centralized Open-Access Rehabilitation database for Stroke (SCOAR), which allows researchers to quickly visualize relationships among variables, efficiently share data, generate hypotheses, and enhance clinical trial design. Bibliographic databases were searched according to inclusion criteria leaving 2,892 titles that were further screened to 514 manuscripts to be screened by full text, leaving 215 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the database (489 independent groups representing 12,847 patients). Demographic, methodological, and statistical data were extracted by independent coders and entered into SCOAR. Trial data came from 114 locations in 27 different countries and represented patients with a wide range of ages, 62 year [41; 85] [shown as median (range)] and at various stages of recovery following their stroke, 141 days [1; 3372]. There was considerable variation in the dose of therapy that patients received, 20 h [0; 221], over interventions of different durations, 28 days [10; 365]. There was also a lack of common data elements (CDEs) across trials, but this lack of CDEs was most pronounced for baseline assessments of patient impairment and severity of stroke. Data integration across hundreds of RCTs allows clinicians and researchers to quickly visualize data from the history of the field and lays the foundation for making SCOAR a living database to which researchers can upload new data as trial results are published. SCOAR is a useful tool for clinicians and researchers that will facilitate data visualization, data sharing, the finding of relevant past studies, and the design of clinical trials by enabling more accurate and comprehensive power analyses. Furthermore, these data speak to the need for CDEs specific to stroke rehabilitation in randomized controlled trials. CRD42014009010.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 63 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 20%
Student > Bachelor 9 14%
Student > Master 8 12%
Researcher 7 11%
Professor 4 6%
Other 14 22%
Unknown 10 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 23%
Neuroscience 10 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 15%
Sports and Recreations 5 8%
Engineering 4 6%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 12 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

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 10 October 2016.
All research outputs
#13,988,427
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#5,470
of 11,809 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,195
of 320,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#41
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,809 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
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 320,233 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.