↓ Skip to main content

Case-Based fMRI Analysis after Cognitive Rehabilitation in MS: A Novel Approach

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
114 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
Case-Based fMRI Analysis after Cognitive Rehabilitation in MS: A Novel Approach
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, April 2015
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2015.00078
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martina Hubacher, Ludwig Kappos, Katrin Weier, Markus Stöcklin, Klaus Opwis, Iris-Katharina Penner

Abstract

Cognitive decline in multiple sclerosis (MS) negatively impacts patients' everyday functioning and quality of life. Since symptomatic pharmacological treatment is not yet available alternative treatment strategies such as cognitive rehabilitation are of particular interest. To analyse the ways in which MS patients respond to cognitive training, by combining behavioral and fMRI data in a case-based triangulation approach. Ten relapsing-remitting (RR) MS patients aged between 39 and 58 years and between 1 and 8 years post MS diagnosis were included. EDSS ranged from 1 to 3.5. Participants had normal to high intelligence levels. Six patients were assigned to the training group (TG) and four to the control group (CG) without intervention. The TG received a 4-week computerized working memory (WM) training, consisting of 16 training sessions of 45 min duration each. Before and after the training a neuropsychological examination and fMRI investigation by using an N-back task of different complexity was applied. Patients in the TG responded differently to cognitive training. Four participants did not meet the triangulation criteria for being treatment responders. The two responders showed two distinct changes regarding activation patterns after training: (I) decreased brain activation associated with increased processing speed and (II) increased brain activation associated with higher processing speed and WM performance. The occurrence of different and opposed response patterns after the same training indicates a risk in applying classical group statistics. Different and especially opposed patterns within the same sample may distort results of classical statistical comparisons. Thus, underlying processes may not be discovered and lead to misinterpretation of results.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 112 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 18%
Researcher 18 16%
Student > Master 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Other 24 21%
Unknown 25 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 14%
Neuroscience 15 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Unspecified 6 5%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 31 27%
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 08 April 2015.
All research outputs
#20,267,098
of 22,797,621 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#8,690
of 11,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,114
of 264,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#64
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,797,621 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 11,669 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. 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 264,934 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 77 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.