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 synergistic effect of acupuncture and computer-based cognitive training on post-stroke cognitive dysfunction: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial of 2 × 2 factorial design
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6882-14-290 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shanli Yang, Haicheng Ye, Jia Huang, Jing Tao, Cai Jiang, Zhicheng Lin, Guohua Zheng, Lidian Chen |
| Abstract |
Stroke is one of the most common causes of cognitive impairment. Up to 75% of stroke survivors may be considered to have cognitive impairment, which severely limit individual autonomy for successful reintegration into family, work and social life. The clinical efficacy of acupuncture with Baihui (DU20) and Shenting (DU24) in stroke and post-stroke cognitive impairment has been previously demonstrated. Computer-assisted cognitive training is part of conventional cognitive rehabilitation and has also shown to be effective in improvement of cognitive function of affected patients. However, the cognitive impairment after stroke is so complexity that one single treatment cannot resolve effectively. Besides, the effects of acupuncture and RehaCom cognitive training have not been systematically compared, nor has the possibility of a synergistic effect of combination of the two therapeutic modalities been evaluated. Our primary aim of this trial is to evaluate the synergistic effect of acupuncture and RehaCom cognitive training on cognitive dysfunction after stroke. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 1 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 229 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 228 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 37 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 34 | 15% |
| Researcher | 27 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 36 | 16% |
| Unknown | 61 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 21% |
| Psychology | 36 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 31 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 20 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 16 | 7% |
| Unknown | 74 | 32% |
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 07 August 2014.
All research outputs
#14,198,374
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#1,678
of 3,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,827
of 230,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#45
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,621 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 230,235 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 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 53% of its contemporaries.