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 |
Combining Robotic Training and Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation in Severe Upper Limb-Impaired Chronic Stroke Patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2016.00088 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vincenzo Di Lazzaro, Fioravante Capone, Giovanni Di Pino, Giovanni Pellegrino, Lucia Florio, Loredana Zollo, Davide Simonetti, Federico Ranieri, Nicoletta Brunelli, Marzia Corbetto, Sandra Miccinilli, Marco Bravi, Stefano Milighetti, Eugenio Guglielmelli, Silvia Sterzi |
| Abstract |
Previous studies suggested that both robot-assisted rehabilitation and non-invasive brain stimulation can produce a slight improvement in severe chronic stroke patients. It is still unknown whether their combination can produce synergistic and more consistent improvements. Safety and efficacy of this combination has been assessed within a proof-of-principle, double-blinded, semi-randomized, sham-controlled trial. Inhibitory continuous Theta Burst Stimulation (cTBS) was delivered on the affected hemisphere, in order to improve the response to the following robot-assisted therapy via a homeostatic increase of learning capacity. Twenty severe upper limb-impaired chronic stroke patients were randomized to robot-assisted therapy associated with real or sham cTBS, delivered for 10 working days. Eight real and nine sham patients completed the study. Change in Fugl-Meyer was chosen as primary outcome, while changes in several quantitative indicators of motor performance extracted by the robot as secondary outcomes. The treatment was well-tolerated by the patients and there were no adverse events. All patients achieved a small, but significant, Fugl-Meyer improvement (about 5%). The difference between the real and the sham cTBS groups was not significant. Among several secondary end points, only the Success Rate (percentage of targets reached by the patient) improved more in the real than in the sham cTBS group. This study shows that a short intensive robot-assisted rehabilitation produces a slight improvement in severe upper-limb impaired, even years after the stroke. The association with homeostatic metaplasticity-promoting non-invasive brain stimulation does not augment the clinical gain in patients with severe stroke. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| Canada | 1 | 25% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 108 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 17% |
| Researcher | 15 | 14% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 14% |
| Unknown | 24 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 19 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 12% |
| Engineering | 8 | 7% |
| Psychology | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 15% |
| Unknown | 28 | 26% |
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 04 July 2016.
All research outputs
#15,739,529
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#6,686
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,602
of 313,892 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#92
of 166 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 313,892 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 166 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.