↓ Skip to main content

Quantification of clinical scores through physiological recordings in low-responsive patients: a feasibility study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 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.
Title
Quantification of clinical scores through physiological recordings in low-responsive patients: a feasibility study
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, May 2012
DOI 10.1186/1743-0003-9-30
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martin Wieser, Lilith Buetler, Heike Vallery, Judith Schaller, Andreas Mayr, Markus Kofler, Leopold Saltuari, Daniel Zutter, Robert Riener

Abstract

Clinical scores represent the gold standard in characterizing the clinical condition of patients in vegetative or minimally conscious state. However, they suffer from problems of sensitivity, specificity, subjectivity and inter-rater reliability.In this feasibility study, objective measures including physiological and neurophysiological signals are used to quantify the clinical state of 13 low-responsive patients. A linear regression method was applied in nine patients to obtain fixed regression coefficients for the description of the clinical state. The statistical model was extended and evaluated with four patients of another hospital. A linear mixed models approach was introduced to handle the challenges of data sets obtained from different locations.Using linear backward regression 12 variables were sufficient to explain 74.4% of the variability in the change of the clinical scores. Variables based on event-related potentials and electrocardiogram account for most of the variability.These preliminary results are promising considering that this is the first attempt to describe the clinical state of low-responsive patients in such a global and quantitative way. This new model could complement the clinical scores based on objective measurements in order to increase diagnostic reliability. Nevertheless, more patients are necessary to prove the conclusions of a statistical model with 12 variables.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 2 8%
Denmark 1 4%
Mexico 1 4%
Unknown 21 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Researcher 3 12%
Professor 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Other 8 32%
Unknown 4 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 5 20%
Psychology 3 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 12%
Engineering 2 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 7 28%
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 06 March 2013.
All research outputs
#18,331,227
of 22,699,621 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#982
of 1,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,964
of 165,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#10
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,699,621 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,277 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. 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 165,113 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.