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 |
Reading Aloud and Solving Simple Arithmetic Calculation Intervention (Learning Therapy) Improves Inhibition, Verbal Episodic Memory, Focus Attention and Processing Speed in Healthy Elderly People: Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00217 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rui Nouchi, Yasuyuki Taki, Hikaru Takeuchi, Takayuki Nozawa, Atsushi Sekiguchi, Ryuta Kawashima |
| Abstract |
Previous reports have described that simple cognitive training using reading aloud and solving simple arithmetic calculations, so-called "learning therapy", can improve executive functions and processing speed in the older adults. Nevertheless, it is not well-known whether learning therapy improve a wide range of cognitive functions or not. We investigated the beneficial effects of learning therapy on various cognitive functions in healthy older adults. We used a single-blinded intervention with two groups (learning therapy group: LT and waiting list control group: WL). Sixty-four elderly were randomly assigned to LT or WL. In LT, participants performed reading Japanese aloud and solving simple calculations training tasks for 6 months. WL did not participate in the intervention. We measured several cognitive functions before and after 6 months intervention periods. Compared to WL, results revealed that LT improved inhibition performance in executive functions (Stroop: LT (Mean = 3.88) vs. WL (Mean = 1.22), adjusted p = 0.013 and reverse Stroop LT (Mean = 3.22) vs. WL (Mean = 1.59), adjusted p = 0.015), verbal episodic memory (Logical Memory (LM): LT (Mean = 4.59) vs. WL (Mean = 2.47), adjusted p = 0.015), focus attention (D-CAT: LT (Mean = 2.09) vs. WL (Mean = -0.59), adjusted p = 0.010) and processing speed compared to the WL control group (digit symbol coding: LT (Mean = 5.00) vs. WL (Mean = 1.13), adjusted p = 0.015 and Symbol Search (SS): LT (Mean = 3.47) vs. WL (Mean = 1.81), adjusted p = 0.014). This randomized controlled trial (RCT) can be showed the benefit of LT on inhibition of executive functions, verbal episodic memory, focus attention and processing speed in healthy elderly people. Our results were discussed under overlapping hypothesis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 25% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 110 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 12% |
| Researcher | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 23 | 21% |
| Unknown | 34 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 20 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 12% |
| Neuroscience | 11 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 14% |
| Unknown | 40 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 28 February 2024.
All research outputs
#2,409,539
of 25,378,162 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#1,119
of 7,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,442
of 342,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#27
of 189 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,378,162 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,682 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 342,537 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 189 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.