↓ Skip to main content

Continuous gait cycle index estimation for electrical stimulation assisted foot drop correction

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 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
Continuous gait cycle index estimation for electrical stimulation assisted foot drop correction
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, August 2014
DOI 10.1186/1743-0003-11-118
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christine Azevedo Coste, Jovana Jovic, Roger Pissard-Gibollet, Jérôme Froger

Abstract

Walking impairment after stroke can be addressed with the use of drop foot stimulators (DFS). Many studies have demonstrated that DFS improves walking speed, reduces spasticity and reduces the physiologic effort of walking. Current DFS, through activation of the common peroneal nerve, elicit ankle dorsiflexion during swing phase of gait. DFS are generally piloted by force sensing resistor placed in the shoe of the affected side with stimulation triggered ON by heel rise and triggered OFF by heel strike. A tilt sensor can also be used with stimulation triggered by the tilt of the shank of the affected leg. These triggering approaches are the standard for initiating stimulation. However, the real-time modulation of FES intensity to provide more optimized delivery of stimulation and also to regulate dorsiflexion in the presence of disturbances, such as fatigue and spasticity may increase the number of potential users of DFS. Concerning research domain, stimulators that would allow modulating the stimulation pattern in between heel rise and strike events would allow exploring new stimulation strategies. We propose to extract continuous information: the gait cycle index (GCI), from one inertial measurement unit (IMU) measuring shank tilt angle. In order to illustrate the use of this real-time information, we show the feasibility of piloting an electrical stimulator.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 124 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 17%
Researcher 20 16%
Student > Bachelor 18 14%
Student > Master 16 13%
Professor 9 7%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 23 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 39 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 11%
Neuroscience 10 8%
Sports and Recreations 5 4%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 29 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 14 August 2014.
All research outputs
#15,303,896
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#832
of 1,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,291
of 230,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#11
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,278 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 230,541 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.