↓ Skip to main content

Proprioceptive sensitivity in Ehlers–Danlos syndrome patients

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
109 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
Proprioceptive sensitivity in Ehlers–Danlos syndrome patients
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, August 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00221-013-3656-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Holly A. Clayton, Erin K. Cressman, Denise Y. P. Henriques

Abstract

Reaching movements are rapidly adapted following training with rotated visual feedback of the hand. Our laboratory has also found that this visuomotor adaptation results in changes in estimates of felt hand position (proprioceptive recalibration) in the direction of the visuomotor distortion (Cressman and Henriques in J Neurophysiol 102:3505-3518, 2009; Cressman et al. in Exp Brain Res 205:533-544, 2010). In the current study, we investigated proprioceptive acuity and proprioceptive recalibration in a group of individuals with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS), a degenerative condition associated with collagen malformation. Some studies have suggested that these patients may have proprioceptive impairments, but the exact nature of the impairment is unclear (Rombaut et al. in Clin Rheumatol 29:289-295, 2010a). In this study, we measured the ability of EDS patients to estimate their felt hand position and tested whether these estimates changed following visuomotor adaptation. We found EDS patients were less precise in estimating their felt hand position in the peripheral workspace compared to healthy controls. Despite this poorer sensitivity, they recalibrated hand proprioception to the same extent as healthy controls. This is consistent with other populations who experience proprioceptive deficits (e.g. the elderly, Parkinson's disease patients), suggesting that sensory noise does not influence the extent of either motor or sensory plasticity.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 107 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Researcher 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 28 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 15%
Psychology 11 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 7%
Sports and Recreations 7 6%
Other 26 24%
Unknown 32 29%
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 15 September 2021.
All research outputs
#14,757,547
of 22,716,996 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#1,929
of 3,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,883
of 198,108 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#18
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,716,996 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 3,217 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 198,108 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 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 54% of its contemporaries.