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 |
Biomechanics and neural control of movement, 20 years later: what have we learned and what has changed?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12984-017-0298-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrew D. Nordin, William Z. Rymer, Andrew A. Biewener, Andrew B. Schwartz, Daofen Chen, Fay B. Horak |
| Abstract |
We summarize content from the opening thematic session of the 20th anniversary meeting for Biomechanics and Neural Control of Movement (BANCOM). Scientific discoveries from the past 20 years of research are covered, highlighting the impacts of rapid technological, computational, and financial growth on motor control research. We discuss spinal-level communication mechanisms, relationships between muscle structure and function, and direct cortical movement representations that can be decoded in the control of neuroprostheses. In addition to summarizing the rich scientific ideas shared during the session, we reflect on research infrastructure and capacity that contributed to progress in the field, and outline unresolved issues and remaining open questions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 49 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 States | 11 | 22% |
| Canada | 7 | 14% |
| Australia | 4 | 8% |
| China | 3 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 6% |
| Uruguay | 1 | 2% |
| Chile | 1 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Bolivia, Plurinational State of | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 14 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 28 | 57% |
| Members of the public | 17 | 35% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 204 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 204 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 51 | 25% |
| Researcher | 26 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 7% |
| Other | 45 | 22% |
| Unknown | 29 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 60 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 19 | 9% |
| Sports and Recreations | 14 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 33 | 16% |
| Unknown | 47 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 19 November 2017.
All research outputs
#1,166,414
of 25,839,971 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#34
of 1,433 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,014
of 324,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#1
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,839,971 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,433 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 324,484 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.