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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Recommendations for the use of Serious Games in people with Alzheimer's Disease, related disorders and frailty
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnagi.2014.00054 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Philippe H. Robert, Alexandra König, Hélene Amieva, Sandrine Andrieu, François Bremond, Roger Bullock, Mathieu Ceccaldi, Bruno Dubois, Serge Gauthier, Paul-Ariel Kenigsberg, Stéphane Nave, Jean M. Orgogozo, Julie Piano, Michel Benoit, Jacques Touchon, Bruno Vellas, Jerome Yesavage, Valeria Manera |
| Abstract |
Alzheimer's disease and other related disorders (ADRD) represent a major challenge for health care systems within the aging population. It is therefore important to develop better instruments to assess the disease severity and progression, as well as to improve its treatment, stimulation, and rehabilitation. This is the underlying idea for the development of Serious Games (SG). These are digital applications specially adapted for purposes other than entertaining; such as rehabilitation, training and education. Recently, there has been an increase of interest in the use of SG targeting patients with ADRD. However, this field is completely uncharted, and the clinical, ethical, economic and research impact of the employment of SG in these target populations has never been systematically addressed. The aim of this paper is to systematically analyze the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) of employing SG with patients with ADRD in order to provide practical recommendations for the development and use of SG in these populations. These analyses and recommendations were gathered, commented on and validated during a 2-round workshop in the context of the 2013 Clinical Trial of Alzheimer's Disease (CTAD) conference, and endorsed by stakeholders in the field. The results revealed that SG may offer very useful tools for professionals involved in the care of patients suffering from ADRD. However, more interdisciplinary work should be done in order to create SG specifically targeting these populations. Furthermore, in order to acquire more academic and professional credibility and acceptance, it will be necessary to invest more in research targeting efficacy and feasibility. Finally, the emerging ethical challenges should be considered a priority. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 13% |
| Canada | 1 | 13% |
| Ireland | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 5 | 63% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 390 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 3 | <1% |
| Spain | 3 | <1% |
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Mexico | 2 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Singapore | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 378 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 58 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 55 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 51 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 47 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 24 | 6% |
| Other | 69 | 18% |
| Unknown | 86 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 54 | 14% |
| Psychology | 49 | 13% |
| Engineering | 37 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 23 | 6% |
| Other | 87 | 22% |
| Unknown | 105 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 29 September 2016.
All research outputs
#5,636,631
of 22,749,166 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#2,272
of 4,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,741
of 223,836 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#12
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,749,166 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,745 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 223,836 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 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 72% of its contemporaries.