↓ Skip to main content

Feasibility trial of an early therapy in perinatal stroke (eTIPS)

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, July 2018
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 (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

24 tweeters


5 Dimensions

Readers on

106 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.
Feasibility trial of an early therapy in perinatal stroke (eTIPS)
Published in
BMC Neurology, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12883-018-1106-4
Pubmed ID

Anna Purna Basu, Janice Pearse, Rose Watson, Pat Dulson, Jessica Baggaley, Blythe Wright, Denise Howel, Luke Vale, Dipayan Mitra, Nick Embleton, Tim Rapley


Perinatal stroke (PS) affects up to 1/2300 infants and frequently leads to unilateral cerebral palsy (UCP). Preterm-born infants affected by unilateral haemorrhagic parenchymal infarction (HPI) are also at risk of UCP. To date no standardised early therapy approach exists, yet early intervention could be highly effective, by positively influencing processes of activity-dependent plasticity within the developing nervous system including the corticospinal tract. Our aim was to test feasibility and acceptability of an "early Therapy In Perinatal Stroke" (eTIPS) intervention, aiming ultimately to improve motor outcome. Design: Feasibility trial, North-East England, August 2015-September 2017. Participants were infants with PS or HPI, their carers and therapists. The intervention consisted of a parent-delivered lateralised therapy approach starting from term equivalent age and continuing until 6 months corrected age. The outcome measures were feasibility (recruitment and retention rates) and acceptability of the intervention (parental questionnaires including the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEBWMS), qualitative observations and in-depth interviews with parents and therapists). We also reviewed clinical imaging data and undertook assessments of motor function, including the Hand Assessment for Infants (HAI). Assessments were also piloted in typically developing (TD) infants, to provide further information on their ease of use and acceptability. Over a period of 18 months we screened 20 infants referred as PS/HPI: 14 met the inclusion criteria and 13 took part. At 6 months, 11 (85%) of those enrolled had completed the final assessment. Parents valued the intervention and found it acceptable and workable. There were no adverse events related to the intervention. We recruited 14 TD infants, one of whom died prior to undertaking any assessments and one of whom was subsequently found to have a condition affecting neurodevelopmental progress: thus, data for 12 TD infants was analysed to 6 months. The HAI was well tolerated by infants and highly valued by parents. Completion rates for the WEBWMS were high and did not suggest any adverse effect of engagement in eTIPS on parental mental wellbeing. The eTIPS intervention was feasible to deliver and acceptable to families. We plan to investigate efficacy in a multicentre randomised controlled trial. ISRCTN12547427 (registration request submitted 28/05/2015; retrospectively registered, 30/09/2015).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 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 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Researcher 9 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 8%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 27 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 18 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 16%
Psychology 15 14%
Neuroscience 6 6%
Unspecified 2 2%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 35 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 25 August 2018.
All research outputs
of 16,614,363 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
of 1,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 281,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,614,363 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,854 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 281,781 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them