| Title |
Mirror visual feedback for the treatment of complex regional pain syndrome (type 1)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Pain and Headache Reports, May 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11916-008-0020-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Candida S. McCabe, Richard C. Haigh, David R. Blake |
| Abstract |
Mirror visual feedback was originally devised as a therapeutic tool to relieve perceived involuntarily movements and paralysis in the phantom limb. Since this pioneering work was conducted in the mid-1990s, the technique has been applied to relieve pain and enhance movement in other chronic conditions such as stroke and complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) type 1. This review describes how mirror visual feedback was first developed with amputees, its original application in CRPS, and how further research has demonstrated its potential benefit within graded motor imagery programs. We discuss the potential mechanisms behind this technique and consider the implications for clinical practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| United States | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 189 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 183 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 31 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 27 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 13% |
| Researcher | 17 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 7% |
| Other | 43 | 23% |
| Unknown | 33 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 56 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 37 | 20% |
| Psychology | 12 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 12 | 6% |
| Engineering | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 27 | 14% |
| Unknown | 36 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 15 February 2017.
All research outputs
#5,429,316
of 25,382,250 outputs
Outputs from Current Pain and Headache Reports
#269
of 884 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,046
of 85,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Pain and Headache Reports
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,250 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 884 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 85,797 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
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 7 of them.