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 |
The Optimal Speed for Cortical Activation of Passive Wrist Movements Performed by a Rehabilitation Robot: A Functional NIRS Study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00194 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sung Jin Bae, Sung Ho Jang, Jeong Pyo Seo, Pyung Hun Chang |
| Abstract |
Objectives: To advance development of rehabilitation robots, the conditions to induce appropriate brain activation during rehabilitation performed by robots should be optimized, based on the concept of brain plasticity. In this study, we examined differences in cortical activation according to the speed of passive wrist movements performed by a rehabilitation robot. Methods: Twenty three normal subjects participated in this study. Passive movements of the right wrist were performed by the wrist rehabilitation robot at three different speeds: 0.25 Hz; slow, 0.5 Hz; moderate and 0.75 Hz; fast. We used functional near-infrared spectroscopy to measure the brain activity accompanying the passive movements performed by a robot. The relative changes in oxy-hemoglobin (HbO) were measured in two regions of interest (ROI): the primary sensory-motor cortex (SM1) and premotor area (PMA). Results: In the left SM1 the HbO value was significantly higher at 0.5 Hz, compared with movements performed at 0.25 Hz and 0.75 Hz (p < 0.05), while no significant differences were observed in the left PMA (p > 0.05). In the group analysis, the left SM1 was activated during passive movements at three speeds (uncorrected p < 0.05) and the greatest activation in the SM1 was observed at 0.5 Hz. Conclusions: In conclusion, the contralateral SM1 showed the greatest activation by a moderate speed (0.5 Hz) rather than slow (0.25 Hz) and fast (0.75 Hz) speed. Our results suggest an ideal speed for execution of the wrist rehabilitation robot. Therefore, our results might provide useful data for more effective and empirically-based robot rehabilitation therapy. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 16% |
| Researcher | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 16% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 8 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 19% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 11% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 10 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 April 2017.
All research outputs
#13,854,210
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,227
of 7,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,824
of 310,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#128
of 191 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,180 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 310,172 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 191 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.