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 |
Rehabilitation Interventions for Unilateral Neglect after Stroke: A Systematic Review from 1997 through 2012
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00187 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nicole Y. H. Yang, Dong Zhou, Raymond C. K. Chung, Cecilia W. P. Li-Tsang, Kenneth N. K. Fong |
| Abstract |
A systematic review of the effectiveness of rehabilitation for persons with unilateral neglect (UN) after stroke was conducted by searching the computerized databases from 1997 through 2012. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of neglect treatment strategies for stroke patients which used the Behavioral Inattention Test (BIT) as the primary outcome measure were eligible for inclusion. Out of 201 studies initially identified, 12 RCTs covering 277 participants were selected for analysis. All had the same weakness of low power with smaller samples and limitation in the blinding of the design. Prism Adaptation (PA) was the most commonly used intervention while continuous Theta-burst stimulation (cTBS) appeared to be a new approach. Meta-analysis showed that for immediate effects, the BIT conventional subscore had a significant and large mean effect size (ES = 0.76; 95% CI 0.28-1.23; p = 0.002) whereas the BIT total score showed a modestly significant mean ES (ES = 0.55; 95% CI 0.16-0.94; p = 0.006). No significant mean ES in sensitivity analysis was found for long-lasting effects across all BIT outcomes. PA appeared to be the most effective intervention based on the results of pooled analysis. More rigorous studies should be done on repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) before it can be concluded that it is a promising treatment for UN. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 | 2 | 29% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 14% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 86% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 255 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 246 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 46 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 31 | 12% |
| Researcher | 26 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 25 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 9% |
| Other | 55 | 22% |
| Unknown | 49 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 51 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 48 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 40 | 16% |
| Neuroscience | 24 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 23 | 9% |
| Unknown | 62 | 24% |
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 05 January 2019.
All research outputs
#5,578,486
of 22,708,120 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,274
of 7,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,786
of 280,717 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#334
of 862 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,708,120 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 7,125 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 280,717 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 862 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 61% of its contemporaries.