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 |
Abdominal Palpation Haptic Device for Colonoscopy Simulation Using Pneumatic Control
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
IEEE Transactions on Haptics, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1109/toh.2011.66 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M. Cheng, W. Marinovic, M. Watson, S. Ourselin, J. Passenger, H. De Visser, O. Salvado, S. Riek |
| Abstract |
In this paper, we describe the development of a haptic device to be used in a simulator aiming to train the skills of gastroenterology assistants in abdominal palpation during colonoscopy, as well as to train team interaction skills for the colonoscopy team. To understand the haptic feedback forces to be simulated by the haptic device, we conducted an experiment with five participants of varying BMI. The applied forces and displacements were measured and hysteresis modeling was used to characterize the experimental data. These models were used to determine the haptic feedback forces required to simulate a BMI case in response to the real-time user interactions. The pneumatic haptic device consisted of a sphygmomanometer bladder as the haptic interface and a fuzzy controller to regulate the bladder pressure. The haptic device showed good steady state and dynamic response was adequate for simulating haptic interactions. Tracking accuracy averaged 94.2 percent within 300 ms of the reference input while the user was actively applying abdominal palpation and minor repositioning. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 36 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 34% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 13% |
| Researcher | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 13 | 34% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 13% |
| Psychology | 3 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 18% |
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 04 November 2011.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from IEEE Transactions on Haptics
#192
of 284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,884
of 180,825 outputs
Outputs of similar age from IEEE Transactions on Haptics
#6
of 9 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 284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 180,825 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.