↓ Skip to main content

Recent developments in biofeedback for neuromotor rehabilitation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, June 2006
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
250 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
442 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
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
Recent developments in biofeedback for neuromotor rehabilitation
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, June 2006
DOI 10.1186/1743-0003-3-11
Pubmed ID
Authors

He Huang, Steven L Wolf, Jiping He

Abstract

The original use of biofeedback to train single muscle activity in static positions or movement unrelated to function did not correlate well to motor function improvements in patients with central nervous system injuries. The concept of task-oriented repetitive training suggests that biofeedback therapy should be delivered during functionally related dynamic movement to optimize motor function improvement. Current, advanced technologies facilitate the design of novel biofeedback systems that possess diverse parameters, advanced cue display, and sophisticated control systems for use in task-oriented biofeedback. In light of these advancements, this article: (1) reviews early biofeedback studies and their conclusions; (2) presents recent developments in biofeedback technologies and their applications to task-oriented biofeedback interventions; and (3) discusses considerations regarding the therapeutic system design and the clinical application of task-oriented biofeedback therapy. This review should provide a framework to further broaden the application of task-oriented biofeedback therapy in neuromotor rehabilitation.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 442 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 <1%
United States 3 <1%
Switzerland 3 <1%
France 3 <1%
Italy 2 <1%
Austria 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Other 8 2%
Unknown 413 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 105 24%
Student > Master 66 15%
Researcher 62 14%
Student > Bachelor 34 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 28 6%
Other 89 20%
Unknown 58 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 158 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 65 15%
Neuroscience 27 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 5%
Computer Science 21 5%
Other 65 15%
Unknown 84 19%
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 20 May 2013.
All research outputs
#20,196,270
of 22,714,025 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#1,137
of 1,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,771
of 63,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,714,025 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,278 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 63,933 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.