↓ Skip to main content

Brain structure and executive functions in children with cerebral palsy: A systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
133 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
Brain structure and executive functions in children with cerebral palsy: A systematic review
Published in
Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, March 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.ridd.2013.01.035
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lonneke Weierink, R. Jeroen Vermeulen, Roslyn N. Boyd

Abstract

This systematic review aimed to establish the current knowledge about brain structure and executive function (EF) in children with cerebral palsy (CP). Five databases were searched (up till July 2012). Six articles met the inclusion criteria, all included structural brain imaging though no functional brain imaging. Study quality was assessed using the STROBE checklist. All articles scored between 58.7% and 70.5% for quality (100% is the maximum score). The included studies all reported poorer performance on EF tasks for children with CP compared to children without CP. For the selected EF measures non-significant effect sizes were found for the CP group compared to a semi-control group (children without cognitive deficits but not included in a control group). This could be due to the small sample sizes, group heterogeneity and lack of comparison of the CP group to typically developing children. The included studies did not consider specific brain areas associated with EF performance. To conclude, there is a paucity of brain imaging studies focused on EF in children with CP, especially of studies that include functional brain imaging. Outcomes of the present studies are difficult to compare as each study included different EF measures and cortical abnormality measures.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Finland 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 131 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 15%
Student > Bachelor 16 12%
Researcher 14 11%
Student > Postgraduate 9 7%
Other 25 19%
Unknown 20 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 33 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 10%
Neuroscience 7 5%
Engineering 6 5%
Other 16 12%
Unknown 28 21%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 April 2021.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities
#1,549
of 2,300 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,141
of 209,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities
#33
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,300 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 209,695 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.