↓ Skip to main content

Interventions for disorders of eye movement in patients with stroke

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2011
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 (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
19 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 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
Interventions for disorders of eye movement in patients with stroke
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008389.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alex Pollock, Christine Hazelton, Clair A Henderson, Jayne Angilley, Baljean Dhillon, Peter Langhorne, Katrina Livingstone, Frank A Munro, Heather Orr, Fiona J Rowe, Uma Shahani

Abstract

Eye movement disorders may affect over 70% of stroke patients. These eye movement disorders can result in difficulty maintaining the normal ocular position and difficulty moving the eyes appropriately. The resulting functional disabilities include a loss of depth perception, reduced hand-to-eye co-ordination, marked difficulties with near tasks and reading and reduced ability to scan the visual environment. They can also impact on the effectiveness of rehabilitation therapy. There are a wide variety of different treatment interventions proposed for eye movement disorders after stroke. However, in the past, there has been a lack of evidence specific to the impact of interventions on the functional outcome of patients with stroke.

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 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 6 4%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 151 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 20%
Researcher 28 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 16%
Student > Bachelor 16 10%
Unspecified 13 8%
Other 43 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 65 41%
Unspecified 21 13%
Psychology 20 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 9%
Social Sciences 9 6%
Other 28 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 27 April 2018.
All research outputs
#1,213,046
of 12,861,409 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,674
of 10,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,196
of 96,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#26
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,861,409 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,449 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 96,758 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 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 65% of its contemporaries.