↓ Skip to main content

A Randomized Controlled Feasibility Trial of a Specific Cueing Program for Falls Management in Persons With Parkinson Disease and Freezing of Gait

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
244 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
A Randomized Controlled Feasibility Trial of a Specific Cueing Program for Falls Management in Persons With Parkinson Disease and Freezing of Gait
Published in
Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy, July 2015
DOI 10.1097/npt.0000000000000093
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Freezing of gait (FOG) increases fall risk in persons with Parkinson disease (PD). Cueing improves gait parameters associated with freezing, but it is unclear whether a cueing program can address falling. We used a parallel-groups delayed- (n = 12) or immediate-start (n = 9) randomized controlled trial design to evaluate a cueing exercise program for FOG and falls in participants with PD. Each group received preintervention falls monitoring, followed by a 6-month standardized, home-based, cueing exercise and education program. Participant questionnaires rated program value and compliance. Freezing was measured with the New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (NFOGQ). Falls were recorded by weekly diaries. Self-reported adherence was high; 83% of participants reported exercising after 6 months. Participants reported that the program was beneficial (89%), walking improved (78%), falls were fewer (73%), and self-management of freezing improved (61%). Mean (standard deviation) NFOGQ scores were 14.8 (5.0), for the immediate (n = 10), and 16.0 (7.7) for the delayed group (n = 9), after 6 months (difference -1.0 [95% confidence interval, -7.9 to 6.0; P = 0.78]) . With baseline NFOGQ scores as a covariate, the estimate of difference was -0.7 (95% confidence interval, -6.1 to 4.7; P = 0.79). The relative rate of falls for immediate compared with delayed groups was 1.22 (95% confidence interval, 0.45 to 3.26). The cueing program intervention is acceptable and participants feel they improve; however, this small feasibility study lacks statistical power to detect important changes in falls rates or FOG severity. A larger study is warranted to further investigate the potential to influence FOG and falls.Video Abstract available for more insights from the authors (Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/JNPT/A105).

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 244 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 241 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 39 16%
Student > Master 38 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 10%
Researcher 15 6%
Other 12 5%
Other 34 14%
Unknown 82 34%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 46 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 44 18%
Neuroscience 16 7%
Sports and Recreations 11 5%
Psychology 10 4%
Other 25 10%
Unknown 92 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 07 August 2015.
All research outputs
#7,895,727
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy
#203
of 556 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,858
of 277,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy
#6
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 556 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 277,602 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.