↓ Skip to main content

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for children with cerebral palsy: a review

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Disease in Childhood, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
235 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
Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for children with cerebral palsy: a review
Published in
Archives of Disease in Childhood, March 2012
DOI 10.1136/archdischild-2011-300437
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The aim of this review paper is to consider the application of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) to improve gait or upper limb function in children with cerebral palsy (CP). Although most NMES research has been directed at adults with neurological conditions, there is a growing body of evidence supporting its use in children with CP. In line with a recent meta-analysis, the use of electrical stimulation to minimise impairment and activity limitations during gait is cautiously advocated. A detailed commentary on one of the most common lower limb NMES applications, tibialis anterior stimulation (either with or without gastrocnemius stimulation) is given. Although there is a lack of randomised controlled trials and a predominance of mainly small studies, this review further concludes that the balance of available evidence is in favour of upper limb exercise NMES offering benefits such as increased muscle strength, range of motion and function in children with CP. The use of dynamic splinting with NMES has been shown to be more effective than either treatment on its own in improving function and posture. There is at present little published work to support the application of botulinum toxin type A to temporarily reduce muscle tone as an adjunct intervention to NMES in this population, although the presence of parallel applications to manage similar symptoms in other muscular disorders is noted.

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 235 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 %
Spain 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
Unknown 228 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 14%
Student > Master 27 11%
Student > Bachelor 25 11%
Researcher 23 10%
Other 15 6%
Other 42 18%
Unknown 69 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 34 14%
Engineering 24 10%
Sports and Recreations 11 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 4%
Other 20 9%
Unknown 83 35%
Attention Score in Context

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 24 January 2016.
All research outputs
#22,826,458
of 31,978,644 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Disease in Childhood
#7,402
of 9,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,528
of 197,579 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Disease in Childhood
#32
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 31,978,644 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,223 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 197,579 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.