↓ Skip to main content

Read-Right: a “web app” that improves reading speeds in patients with hemianopia

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurology, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
Title
Read-Right: a “web app” that improves reading speeds in patients with hemianopia
Published in
Journal of Neurology, June 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00415-012-6549-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yean-Hoon Ong, Maurice M. Brown, Patrick Robinson, Gordon T. Plant, Masud Husain, Alexander P. Leff

Abstract

Effective behavioral therapies exist for patients with brain injury. The main issue is one of access. Can the internet be used as a resource so that suitable patients can build up enough practice to improve? We tested this hypothesis using a web-based application for patients with a right-sided hemianopia causing slow text reading. We studied 33 patients aged 26-81 years who fitted the entry criteria and accessed the therapy website between May 2010 and December 2011, in a longitudinal cohort study. The therapy consisted of reading animated, laterally scrolling text whose content and form was selected by the patients. Reading speeds on static text (main outcome) were assessed after every 5-h period of practice had been accrued. Statistical analysis was carried out using a repeated measures ANOVA. Read-Right therapy produced significant improvements in text reading speeds at all time points with a clear dose effect: 10 % at 5 h, 20 % at 10 h, 39 % at 15 h and 46 % at 20 h. Sub-analyses demonstrated that this was unlikely to be due to either multiple exposure to the testing materials (familiarity) or to the simple passage of time. This is the first example of a clinically proven therapy being delivered effectively to stroke patients over the internet. As therapists' time is more limited than patients' capacity to improve, carefully designed, web-based resources like Read-Right represent a realistic way of delivering a sufficient therapy dose to patients so they can obtain clinically meaningful improvements.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 1%
Hong Kong 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Unknown 96 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 16%
Researcher 14 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Postgraduate 7 7%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 22 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 18%
Psychology 18 18%
Neuroscience 10 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 24 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 February 2021.
All research outputs
#13,132,060
of 22,669,724 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurology
#2,733
of 4,448 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,625
of 167,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurology
#20
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,669,724 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,448 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 167,155 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 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 55% of its contemporaries.