↓ Skip to main content

Does Cognitive Impairment Affect Rehabilitation Outcome in Parkinson’s Disease?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
100 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
Does Cognitive Impairment Affect Rehabilitation Outcome in Parkinson’s Disease?
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, August 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2016.00192
Pubmed ID
Authors

Davide Ferrazzoli, Paola Ortelli, Roberto Maestri, Rossana Bera, Nir Giladi, Maria Felice Ghilardi, Gianni Pezzoli, Giuseppe Frazzitta

Abstract

The cognitive status is generally considered as a major determinant of rehabilitation outcome in Parkinson's disease (PD). No studies about the effect of cognitive impairment on motor rehabilitation outcomes in PD have been performed before. This study is aimed to evaluate the impact of cognitive decline on rehabilitation outcomes in patients with PD. We retrospectively identified 485 patients with PD hospitalized for a 4-week Multidisciplinary Intensive Rehabilitation Treatment (MIRT) between January 2014 and September 2015. According to Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), patients were divided into: group 1-normal cognition (score 27-30), group 2-mild cognitive impairment (score 21-26), group 3-moderate or severe cognitive impairment (score ≤ 20). According to Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB), subjects were divided into patients with normal (score ≥13.8) and pathological (score <13.8) executive functions. The outcome measures were: Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), Parkinson's Disease Disability Scale (PDDS), Six Minutes Walking Test (6MWT), Timed Up and Go Test (TUG) and Berg Balance Scale (BBS). All scales had worse values with the increase of cognitive impairment and passing from normal to pathological executive functions. After rehabilitation, all the outcome measures improved in all groups (p < 0.0001). Between groups, the percentage of improvement was significantly different for total UPDRS (p = 0.0009, best improvement in normal MMSE group; p = 0.019, best improvement in normal FAB group), and BBS (p < 0.0001, all pairwise comparisons significant, best improvement in patients with worse MMSE score; p < 0.0001, best improvement in patients with pathological FAB). TUG (p = 0.006) and BBS (p < 0.0001) improved in patients with pathological FAB score, more than in those with normal FAB score. Patients gain benefit in the rehabilitative outcomes, regardless of cognition. Our data suggest that rehabilitation could be effective also in Parkinsonian subjects with cognitive impairment, as well as with dysexecutive syndrome.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 99 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 15%
Student > Bachelor 12 12%
Researcher 12 12%
Other 7 7%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 26 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 17 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 15%
Psychology 10 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 30 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 June 2020.
All research outputs
#8,198,194
of 25,402,889 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#3,079
of 5,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,631
of 369,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#36
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,402,889 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,509 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 369,245 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 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 51% of its contemporaries.