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 |
Self-report prospective memory problems in people with stroke
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brain Injury, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3109/02699052.2014.974672 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Man, Calvin Yip, Grace Lee, Jennifer Fleming, David Shum |
| Abstract |
Abstract Background and purpose: Prospective memory (PM) is a common problem which can limit performance of basic and instrumental activities of daily living in patients with stroke. This study compared self-report PM failures between older and younger people with stroke, examined differences in perceptions of PM failures between people with stroke and relatives, relationships between these PM failures and functional performance. Methods: A total of 105 patients with stroke, 65 relatives and 112 healthy controls were recruited. Both the patients with stroke and controls were further divided into an older (age > 55 years) and a younger (age ≤ 55 years) group. Data for patients with stroke and relatives were obtained via the Brief Assessment of Prospective Memory (BAPM), Basic Activity of Daily Living (BADL) related Modified Barthel Index (MBI) and Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (Lawton IADL) Scale. Healthy controls' data were also collected. Results: The older stroke group had significantly higher BAPM total scores and BADL and IADL sub-scale scores than the younger group. Difference in perceptions of the patients' self-report of PM failures and their relatives' report was significant for the IADL sub-scale. Self-report of PM failure was significantly related to functional BADL and IADL measures. Conclusions: Results highlight the impact of PM failures in patients with stroke and their assessment, management and rehabilitation of these patients. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 2 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Ireland | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 58 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Unknown | 18 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 14 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 11% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 21 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 17 May 2017.
All research outputs
#3,114,027
of 22,769,322 outputs
Outputs from Brain Injury
#235
of 1,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,165
of 260,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Injury
#8
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,769,322 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,887 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 260,456 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 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 70% of its contemporaries.