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 |
Clinical usefulness of brain-computer interface-controlled functional electrical stimulation for improving brain activity in children with spastic cerebral palsy: a pilot randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Physical Therapy Science, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1589/jpts.28.2491 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tae-Woo Kim, Byoung-Hee Lee |
| Abstract |
[Purpose] Evaluating the effect of brain-computer interface (BCI)-based functional electrical stimulation (FES) training on brain activity in children with spastic cerebral palsy (CP) was the aim of this study. [Subjects and Methods] Subjects were randomized into a BCI-FES group (n=9) and a functional electrical stimulation (FES) control group (n=9). Subjects in the BCI-FES group received wrist and hand extension training with FES for 30 minutes per day, 5 times per week for 6 weeks under the BCI-based program. The FES group received wrist and hand extension training with FES for the same amount of time. Sensorimotor rhythms (SMR) and middle beta waves (M-beta) were measured in frontopolar regions 1 and 2 (Fp1, Fp2) to determine the effects of BCI-FES training. [Results] Significant improvements in the SMR and M-beta of Fp1 and Fp2 were seen in the BCI-FES group. In contrast, significant improvement was only seen in the SMR and M-beta of Fp2 in the control group. [Conclusion] The results of the present study suggest that BCI-controlled FES training may be helpful in improving brain activity in patients with cerebral palsy and may be applied as effectively as traditional FES training. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 63 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 21 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 13% |
| Engineering | 6 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 23 | 37% |
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 October 2016.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Physical Therapy Science
#1,292
of 1,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,811
of 330,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Physical Therapy Science
#44
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,731 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 330,428 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.