↓ Skip to main content

Effect of Visual Feedback on the Occipital-Parietal-Motor Network in Parkinson’s Disease with Freezing of Gait

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 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
Effect of Visual Feedback on the Occipital-Parietal-Motor Network in Parkinson’s Disease with Freezing of Gait
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2013.00209
Pubmed ID
Authors

Priya D. Velu, Tim Mullen, Eunho Noh, Matthew C. Valdivia, Howard Poizner, Yoram Baram, Virginia R. de Sa

Abstract

Freezing of gait (FOG) is an elusive phenomenon that debilitates a large number of Parkinson's disease (PD) patients regardless of stage of disease, medication status, or deep brain stimulation implantation. Sensory feedback cues, especially visual feedback cues, have been shown to alleviate FOG episodes or even prevent episodes from occurring. Here, we examine cortical information flow between occipital, parietal, and motor areas during the pre-movement stage of gait in a PD-with-FOG patient that had a strong positive behavioral response to visual cues, one PD-with-FOG patient without any behavioral response to visual cues, and age-matched healthy controls, before and after training with visual feedback. Results for this case study show differences in cortical information flow between the responding PD-with-FOG patient and the other two subject types, notably, an increased information flow in the beta range. Tentatively suggesting the formation of an alternative cortical sensory-motor pathway during training with visual feedback, these results are proposed as subject for further verification employing larger cohorts of patients.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 84 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Unspecified 7 8%
Researcher 7 8%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 22 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 20%
Neuroscience 10 11%
Psychology 8 9%
Unspecified 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 7%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 24 28%
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 09 January 2014.
All research outputs
#20,216,580
of 22,739,983 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#8,653
of 11,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#264,747
of 305,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#21
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,739,983 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,646 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 305,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 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.