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 |
Combining Mental Training and Physical Training With Goal-Oriented Protocols in Stroke Rehabilitation: A Feasibility Case Study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00125 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xin Zhang, Ahmed M. Elnady, Bubblepreet K. Randhawa, Lara A. Boyd, Carlo Menon |
| Abstract |
Stroke is one of the leading causes of permanent disability in adults. The literature suggests that rehabilitation is key to early motor recovery. However, conventional therapy is labor and cost intensive. Robotic and functional electrical stimulation (FES) devices can provide a high dose of repetitions and as such may provide an alternative, or an adjunct, to conventional rehabilitation therapy. Brain-computer interfaces (BCI) could augment neuroplasticity by introducing mental training. However, mental training alone is not enough; but combining mental with physical training could boost outcomes. In the current case study, a portable rehabilitative platform and goal-oriented supporting training protocols were introduced and tested with a chronic stroke participant. A novel training method was introduced with the proposed rehabilitative platform. A 37-year old individual with chronic stroke participated in 6-weeks of training (18 sessions in total, 3 sessions a week, and 1 h per session). In this case study, we show that an individual with chronic stroke can tolerate a 6-week training bout with our system and protocol. The participant was actively engaged throughout the training. Changes in the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) suggest that the training positively affected arm motor function (12% improvement in WMFT score). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Puerto Rico | 1 | 20% |
| Chile | 1 | 20% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 92 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 11% |
| Researcher | 5 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Unknown | 27 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 15 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 7% |
| Sports and Recreations | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 13 | 14% |
| Unknown | 31 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 07 April 2018.
All research outputs
#13,067,725
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,687
of 7,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,521
of 329,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#84
of 139 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,195 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 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 329,091 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 139 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.