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 |
A Case–Control Study Investigating Simulated Driving Errors in Ischemic Stroke and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neurology, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fneur.2018.00054 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Megan A. Hird, Kristin A. Vesely, Tahira Tasneem, Gustavo Saposnik, R. Loch Macdonald, Tom A. Schweizer |
| Abstract |
Stroke can affect a variety of cognitive, perceptual, and motor abilities that are important for safe driving. Results of studies assessing post-stroke driving ability are quite variable in the areas and degree of driving impairment among patients. This highlights the need to consider clinical characteristics, including stroke subtype, when assessing driving performance. We compared the simulated driving performance of 30 chronic stroke patients (>3 months), including 15 patients with ischemic stroke (IS) and 15 patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), and 20 age-matched controls. A preliminary analysis was performed, subdividing IS patients into right (n = 8) and left (n = 6) hemispheric lesions and SAH patients into middle cerebral artery (MCA,n = 5) and anterior communicating artery (n = 6) territory. A secondary analysis was conducted to investigate the cognitive correlates of driving. Nine patients (30%) exhibited impaired simulated driving performance, including four patients with IS (26.7%) and five patients with SAH (33.3%). Both patients with IS (2.3 vs. 0.3,U = 76,p < 0.05) and SAH (1.5 vs. 0.3,U = 45,p < 0.001) exhibited difficulty with lane maintenance (% distance out of lane) compared to controls. In addition, patients with IS exhibited difficulty with speed maintenance (% distance over speed limit; 8.9 vs. 4.1,U = 81,p < 0.05), whereas SAH patients exhibited difficulty with turning performance (total turning errors; 5.4 vs. 1.6,U = 39.5,p < 0.001). The Trail Making Test (TMT) and Useful Field of View test were significantly associated with lane maintenance among patients with IS (rs > 0.6,p < 0.05). No cognitive tests showed utility among patients with SAH. Both IS and SAH exhibited difficulty with lane maintenance. Patients with IS additionally exhibited difficulty with speed maintenance, whereas SAH patients exhibited difficulty with turning performance. Current results support the importance of differentiating between stroke subtypes and considering other important clinical characteristics (e.g., side of lesion, vascular territory) when assessing driving performance and reinforce the importance of physicians discussing driving safety with patients after stroke. |
X Demographics
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.
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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 17% |
| Researcher | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 9 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 14% |
| Psychology | 4 | 11% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 9% |
| Engineering | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 11 | 31% |
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 13 February 2018.
All research outputs
#20,465,050
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#8,938
of 11,915 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#383,520
of 446,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#175
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 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 11,915 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. 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 446,078 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 237 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.