↓ Skip to main content

Current Trends in Robot-Assisted Upper-Limb Stroke Rehabilitation: Promoting Patient Engagement in Therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Current Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Reports, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
161 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
284 Mendeley
Title
Current Trends in Robot-Assisted Upper-Limb Stroke Rehabilitation: Promoting Patient Engagement in Therapy
Published in
Current Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Reports, June 2014
DOI 10.1007/s40141-014-0056-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amy A. Blank, James A. French, Ali Utku Pehlivan, Marcia K. O’Malley

Abstract

Stroke is one of the leading causes of long-term disability today; therefore, many research efforts are focused on designing maximally effective and efficient treatment methods. In particular, robotic stroke rehabilitation has received significant attention for upper-limb therapy due to its ability to provide high-intensity repetitive movement therapy with less effort than would be required for traditional methods. Recent research has focused on increasing patient engagement in therapy, which has been shown to be important for inducing neural plasticity to facilitate recovery. Robotic therapy devices enable unique methods for promoting patient engagement by providing assistance only as needed and by detecting patient movement intent to drive to the device. Use of these methods has demonstrated improvements in functional outcomes, but careful comparisons between methods remain to be done. Future work should include controlled clinical trials and comparisons of effectiveness of different methods for patients with different abilities and needs in order to inform future development of patient-specific therapeutic protocols.

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 284 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Taiwan 1 <1%
Unknown 281 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 63 22%
Student > Master 48 17%
Researcher 28 10%
Student > Bachelor 25 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 4%
Other 40 14%
Unknown 68 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 120 42%
Neuroscience 19 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 5%
Computer Science 12 4%
Other 28 10%
Unknown 76 27%
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 22 August 2014.
All research outputs
#18,376,056
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from Current Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Reports
#106
of 154 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,463
of 227,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Reports
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 154 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 227,595 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.