↓ Skip to main content

Walking function in clinical monitoring of multiple sclerosis by telemedicine

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
Title
Walking function in clinical monitoring of multiple sclerosis by telemedicine
Published in
Journal of Neurology, May 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00415-015-7764-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Núria Sola-Valls, Yolanda Blanco, Maria Sepúlveda, Sara Llufriu, Elena H. Martínez-Lapiscina, Delon La Puma, Francesc Graus, Pablo Villoslada, Albert Saiz

Abstract

Walking limitation is a key component of disability in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), but the information on daily walking activity and disability over time is limited. To determine, (1) the agreement between the standard measurements of MS-related disability [expanded disability status scale (EDSS), functional systems (FS) and ambulation index (AI)] obtained by conventional and remote evaluation using a multimedia platform; (2) the usefulness of monitoring 6-min walk test (6MWT) and average daily walking activity (aDWA) to better characterize patients disability. Twenty-five patients (EDSS score 1.0-6.5) were evaluated every 3 months for the first year, and aDWA repeated at year 2. Remote visits included the recording of a video with self-performed neurological examination and specific multimedia questionnaires. aDWA was measured by a triaxial accelerometer. All but two patients completed the study. Modest agreement between conventional and multimedia EDSS was found for EDSS ≤ 4.0 (kappa = 0.2) and good for EDSS ≥ 4.5 (kappa = 0.6). For the overall sample, pyramidal, cerebellar and brainstem FS showed the greatest agreement (kappa = 0.7). SR-AI showed a modest agreement for EDSS ≤ 4.0 and good for EDSS ≥ 4.5 (kappa = 0.3 and 0.6, respectively). There was a strong correlation between conventional and 6MWT measured by accelerometer (r = 0.76). The aDWA correlated strongly with the EDSS (r = -0.86) and a cut-off point of 3279.3 steps/day discriminated patients with ambulatory impairment. There was a significant decline in aDWA over 2 years in patients with ambulatory impairment that were not observed by standard measurements of disability. MS clinical monitoring by telemedicine is feasible, but the observed lower agreement in less disabled patients emphasizes the need to optimize the assessment methodology. Accelerometers capture changes that may indicate deterioration over time.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 72 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 29%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 11%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Student > Master 5 7%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 15 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 26%
Neuroscience 6 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Engineering 4 5%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 23 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 13 April 2016.
All research outputs
#3,559,749
of 22,805,349 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurology
#847
of 4,475 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,116
of 263,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurology
#11
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,805,349 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,475 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 263,961 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 82% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.