↓ Skip to main content

An exploratory investigation of the daily talk time of people with non-fluent aphasia and non-aphasic peers

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
19 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 Mendeley
Title
An exploratory investigation of the daily talk time of people with non-fluent aphasia and non-aphasic peers
Published in
International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, July 2016
DOI 10.1080/17549507.2016.1209558
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caitlin Brandenburg, Linda Worrall, David Copland, Amy Rodriguez

Abstract

This paper presents an exploratory investigation of the talk time of people with non-fluent aphasia, as measured by the CommFit™ app. Aims were to compare the talk time of people with aphasia with non-aphasic peers and measures of impairment, activity and participation. The variability of talk time over weeks and days of the week was also investigated. Twelve people with post-stroke, non-fluent aphasia and seven non-aphasic controls measured their talk time using the CommFit™ app for 6 h/day for 14 days. People with aphasia talked for a mean of 4.5 min/h and non-aphasic controls 7.2 min/h, which was not a significant difference (p = 0.056). Talk time of people with aphasia was not significantly correlated with WAB-R AQ or CADL-2 scores, but a moderate-high positive relationship between talk time and SIPSO scores was found (r = 0.648, p = 0.015). Talk time was not significantly different between the first and second weeks of recording for either group, and days of the week were not significantly different except for Saturdays, in which talk time was higher. This study provides some preliminary data on talk time in people with aphasia, suggesting that talk time is an indicator of participation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 10 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 30%
Student > Bachelor 2 20%
Student > Postgraduate 2 20%
Researcher 1 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 10%
Other 1 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Linguistics 3 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 20%
Social Sciences 1 10%
Computer Science 1 10%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 26 August 2017.
All research outputs
#1,075,728
of 12,458,585 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology
#78
of 456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,681
of 263,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology
#3
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,458,585 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 456 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 263,647 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.