↓ Skip to main content

An Investigation of Bilateral Symmetry During Manual Wheelchair Propulsion

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 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
An Investigation of Bilateral Symmetry During Manual Wheelchair Propulsion
Published in
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, June 2015
DOI 10.3389/fbioe.2015.00086
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shelby L. Soltau, Jonathan S. Slowik, Philip S. Requejo, Sara J. Mulroy, Richard R. Neptune

Abstract

Studies of manual wheelchair propulsion often assume bilateral symmetry to simplify data collection, processing, and analysis. However, the validity of this assumption is unclear. Most investigations of wheelchair propulsion symmetry have been limited by a relatively small sample size and a focus on a single propulsion condition (e.g., level propulsion at self-selected speed). The purpose of this study was to evaluate bilateral symmetry during manual wheelchair propulsion in a large group of subjects across different propulsion conditions. Three-dimensional kinematics and handrim kinetics along with spatiotemporal variables were collected and processed from 80 subjects with paraplegia while propelling their wheelchairs on a stationary ergometer during three different conditions: level propulsion at their self-selected speed (free), level propulsion at their fastest comfortable speed (fast), and propulsion on an 8% grade at their level, self-selected speed (graded). All kinematic variables had significant side-to-side differences, primarily in the graded condition. Push angle was the only spatiotemporal variable with a significant side-to-side difference, and only during the graded condition. No kinetic variables had significant side-to-side differences. The magnitudes of the kinematic differences were low, with only one difference exceeding 5°. With differences of such small magnitude, the bilateral symmetry assumption appears to be reasonable during manual wheelchair propulsion in subjects without significant upper-extremity pain or impairment. However, larger asymmetries may exist in individuals with secondary injuries and pain in their upper extremity and different etiologies of their neurological impairment.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 55 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 19 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 15 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 16%
Sports and Recreations 6 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Mathematics 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 20 36%
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 25 May 2015.
All research outputs
#18,411,569
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#3,390
of 6,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,502
of 266,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#30
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 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 6,525 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 266,832 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.