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 |
Upper-limb virtual rehabilitation for traumatic brain injury: A preliminary within-group evaluation of the elements system
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brain Injury, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.3109/02699052.2011.648706 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nick Mumford, Jonathan Duckworth, Patrick R. Thomas, David Shum, Gavin Williams, Peter H. Wilson |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of the Elements virtual reality (VR) system for rehabilitation of upper-limb function in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Using a within-group design, patients were tested three times, each 4 weeks apart: Pre-intervention 1 and 2 and Post-intervention. During intervention, participants received 12 1-hour training sessions over 4 weeks in addition to their usual care. Five males and four females aged 18-48 years with severe TBI were recruited. The Elements system consisted of a 100-cm tabletop LCD, camera tracking system, tangible user interfaces (i.e. graspable objects of basic shape) and software. The system provided two modes of interaction with augmented feedback: goal-directed and exploratory. Upper-limb performance was assessed using system-rated measures (movement speed, accuracy and efficiency) and standardized tests. Planned comparisons revealed little change in performance over the pre-test period apart from an increase in movement speed. There were significant training effects, with large effect sizes on all measures except the nuts-and-bolts task. These preliminary findings support the results of an early case study of the Elements system, further demonstrating that VR training is a viable adjunct to conventional physical therapy in facilitating motor learning in patients with TBI. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 195 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Croatia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 189 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 39 | 20% |
| Researcher | 28 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 28 | 14% |
| Unknown | 50 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 37 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 12% |
| Psychology | 21 | 11% |
| Engineering | 12 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 31 | 16% |
| Unknown | 62 | 32% |
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 26 February 2012.
All research outputs
#15,242,272
of 22,663,150 outputs
Outputs from Brain Injury
#1,331
of 1,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,271
of 156,342 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Injury
#8
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,150 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,879 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 156,342 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 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.