↓ Skip to main content

Recommendations for the Use of Serious Games in Neurodegenerative Disorders: 2016 Delphi Panel

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
234 Mendeley
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.
Title
Recommendations for the Use of Serious Games in Neurodegenerative Disorders: 2016 Delphi Panel
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01243
Pubmed ID
Authors

Valeria Manera, Grégory Ben-Sadoun, Teun Aalbers, Hovannes Agopyan, Florence Askenazy, Michel Benoit, David Bensamoun, Jérémy Bourgeois, Jonathan Bredin, Francois Bremond, Carlos Crispim-Junior, Renaud David, Bob De Schutter, Eric Ettore, Jennifer Fairchild, Pierre Foulon, Adam Gazzaley, Auriane Gros, Stéphanie Hun, Frank Knoefel, Marcel Olde Rikkert, Minh K. Phan Tran, Antonios Politis, Anne S. Rigaud, Guillaume Sacco, Sylvie Serret, Susanne Thümmler, Marie L. Welter, Philippe Robert

Abstract

The use of Serious Games (SG) in the health domain is expanding. In the field of neurodegenerative disorders (ND) such as Alzheimer's disease, SG are currently employed both to support and improve the assessment of different functional and cognitive abilities, and to provide alternative solutions for patients' treatment, stimulation, and rehabilitation. As the field is quite young, recommendations on the use of SG in people with ND are still rare. In 2014 we proposed some initial recommendations (Robert et al., 2014). The aim of the present work was to update them, thanks to opinions gathered by experts in the field during an expert Delphi panel. Results confirmed that SG are adapted to elderly people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia, and can be employed for several purposes, including assessment, stimulation, and improving wellbeing, with some differences depending on the population (e.g., physical stimulation may be better suited for people with MCI). SG are more adapted for use with trained caregivers (both at home and in clinical settings), with a frequency ranging from 2 to 4 times a week. Importantly, the target of SG, their frequency of use and the context in which they are played depend on the SG typology (e.g., Exergame, cognitive game), and should be personalized with the help of a clinician.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 234 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 234 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 38 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 12%
Student > Bachelor 25 11%
Researcher 24 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 6%
Other 42 18%
Unknown 61 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 42 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 27 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 8%
Neuroscience 17 7%
Computer Science 16 7%
Other 39 17%
Unknown 74 32%
Attention Score in Context

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 04 September 2017.
All research outputs
#5,558,158
of 22,986,950 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#7,946
of 30,181 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,392
of 316,996 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#196
of 560 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,986,950 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 30,181 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 316,996 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 560 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 64% of its contemporaries.