↓ Skip to main content

A multisession evaluation of an adaptive competitive arm rehabilitation game

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
270 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
A multisession evaluation of an adaptive competitive arm rehabilitation game
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12984-017-0336-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maja Goršič, Imre Cikajlo, Nika Goljar, Domen Novak

Abstract

People with neurological injuries such as stroke should exercise frequently and intensely to regain their motor abilities, but are generally hindered by lack of motivation. One way to increase motivation in rehabilitation is through competitive exercises, but such exercises have only been tested in single brief sessions and usually did not adapt difficulty to the patient's abilities. We designed a competitive arm rehabilitation game for two players that dynamically adapts its difficulty to both players' abilities. This game was evaluated by two participant groups: 15 participants with chronic arm impairment who exercised at home with an unimpaired friend or relative, and 20 participants in the acute or subacute phase of stroke who exercised in pairs (10 pairs) at a rehabilitation clinic. All participants first played the game against their human opponent for 3 sessions, then played alone (against a computer opponent) in the final, fourth session. In all sessions, participants' subjective experiences were assessed with the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory questionnaire while exercise intensity was measured using inertial sensors built into the rehabilitation device. After the fourth session, a final brief questionnaire was used to compare competition and exercising alone. Participants who played against an unimpaired friend or relative at home tended to prefer competition (only 1 preferred exercising alone), and exhibited higher enjoyment and exercise intensity when competing (first three sessions) than when exercising alone (last session). Participants who played against each other in the clinic, however, did not exhibit significant differences between competition and exercising alone. For both groups, there was no difference in enjoyment or exercise intensity between the first three sessions, indicating no negative effects of habituation or novelty. Competitive exercises have high potential for unsupervised home rehabilitation, as they improve enjoyment and exercise intensity compared to exercising alone. Such exercises could thus improve rehabilitation outcome, but this needs to be tested in long-term clinical trials. It is not clear why participants who competed against each other at the clinic did not exhibit any advantages of competition, and further studies are needed to determine how different factors (environment, nature of opponent etc.) influence patients' experiences with competitive exercises. The study is not a clinical trial. While human subjects are involved, they do not participate in a full rehabilitation intervention, and no health outcomes are examined.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 270 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 270 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 15%
Student > Master 35 13%
Student > Bachelor 33 12%
Researcher 25 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 6%
Other 27 10%
Unknown 95 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 37 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 36 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 10%
Neuroscience 14 5%
Psychology 12 4%
Other 36 13%
Unknown 107 40%
Attention Score in Context

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 02 January 2018.
All research outputs
#12,999,512
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#591
of 1,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,454
of 439,989 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#17
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,291 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 439,989 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 53% 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 is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.