↓ Skip to main content

Measuring upper limb function in children with hemiparesis with 3D inertial sensors

Overview of attention for article published in Child's Nervous System, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
Title
Measuring upper limb function in children with hemiparesis with 3D inertial sensors
Published in
Child's Nervous System, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00381-017-3580-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher J. Newman, Roselyn Bruchez, Sylvie Roches, Marine Jequier Gygax, Cyntia Duc, Farzin Dadashi, Fabien Massé, Kamiar Aminian

Abstract

Upper limb assessments in children with hemiparesis rely on clinical measurements, which despite standardization are prone to error. Recently, 3D movement analysis using optoelectronic setups has been used to measure upper limb movement, but generalization is hindered by time and cost. Body worn inertial sensors may provide a simple, cost-effective alternative. We instrumented a subset of 30 participants in a mirror therapy clinical trial at baseline, post-treatment, and follow-up clinical assessments, with wireless inertial sensors positioned on the arms and trunk to monitor motion during reaching tasks. Inertial sensor measurements distinguished paretic and non-paretic limbs with significant differences (P < 0.01) in movement duration, power, range of angular velocity, elevation, and smoothness (normalized jerk index and spectral arc length). Inertial sensor measurements correlated with functional clinical tests (Melbourne Assessment 2); movement duration and complexity (Higuchi fractal dimension) showed moderate to strong negative correlations with clinical measures of amplitude, accuracy, and fluency. Inertial sensor measurements reliably identify paresis and correlate with clinical measurements; they can therefore provide a complementary dimension of assessment in clinical practice and during clinical trials aimed at improving upper limb function.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 91 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 16%
Student > Master 13 14%
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Other 5 5%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 30 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 12 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 13%
Neuroscience 11 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 35 38%
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 11 June 2019.
All research outputs
#14,952,935
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Child's Nervous System
#896
of 2,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,562
of 316,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Child's Nervous System
#28
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,797 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 316,647 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.