↓ Skip to main content

Effects of a Group-Based Treadmill Program on Children With Neurodevelopmental Impairment Who Are Not Yet Ambulating

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric physical therapy, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
Effects of a Group-Based Treadmill Program on Children With Neurodevelopmental Impairment Who Are Not Yet Ambulating
Published in
Pediatric physical therapy, October 2016
DOI 10.1097/pep.0000000000000250
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To examine the effects of a group-based treadmill program on gross motor skills related to walking and the amount of support needed for ambulation in children with neuromotor impairment who are not yet walking. Twelve children (mean age, 30.4 months; standard deviation, 7.9) participated in the program twice per week for 14 weeks. The Gross Motor Function Measure-88 Dimensions D and E (GMFM-88 D/E), the Functional Mobility Scale (FMS), the timed 10-m walk test, and the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory Mobility Scale (PEDI) were administered before and at the conclusion of the program. Data were analyzed using paired the t test and Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test. Statistically significant improvements were found between pre- and posttests in the GMFM-88 D (P = .0005) and E (P = .001), in FMS scores (P = .039), and the PEDI (P = .001). A group-based treadmill program leads to positive changes in walking ability in children with neuromotor impairment.

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 2 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 72 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 %
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 71 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 4 6%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 26 36%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 16 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 15%
Sports and Recreations 7 10%
Psychology 3 4%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 27 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 February 2017.
All research outputs
#22,949,607
of 34,361,833 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric physical therapy
#433
of 1,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,799
of 337,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric physical therapy
#7
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,361,833 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,115 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 337,092 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 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 68% of its contemporaries.