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 |
Screening for Cognitive Function in Complete Immobility Using Brain–Machine Interfaces: A Proof of Principle Study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2018.00517 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dorothée Lulé, Katharina Hörner, Cynthia Vazquez, Helena Aho-Özhan, Jürgen Keller, Martin Gorges, Ingo Uttner, Albert C. Ludolph |
| Abstract |
Background: In many neurological conditions, there is a combination of decline in physical function and cognitive abilities. For far advanced stages of physical disability where speaking and hand motor abilities are severely impaired, there is a lack of standardized approach to screen for cognitive profile. Methods:N = 40 healthy subjects were included in the study. For proof of principle, N = 6 ALS patients were additionally measured. For cognitive screening, we used the Edinburgh cognitive and behavioral ALS screen (ECAS) in the standard paper-and-pencil version. Additionally, we adapted the ECAS to a brain-machine interface (BMI) control module to screen for cognition in severely advanced patients. Results: There was a high congruency between BMI version and the paper-and-pencil version of the ECAS. Sensitivity and specificity of the ECAS-BMI were mostly high whereas stress and weariness for the patient were low. Discussion/Conclusion: We hereby present evidence that adaptation of a standardized neuropsychological test for BMI control is feasible. BMI driven neuropsychological test provides congruent results compared to standardized tests with a good specificity and sensitivity but low patient load. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 20% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 23% |
| Researcher | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 10 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 4 | 15% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 15% |
| Psychology | 3 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 10 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 August 2018.
All research outputs
#14,393,794
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#5,644
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,607
of 340,605 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#128
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 340,605 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 237 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.