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 |
Group-based exercise and cognitive-physical training in older adults with self-reported cognitive complaints: The Multiple-Modality, Mind-Motor (M4) study protocol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Geriatrics, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12877-016-0190-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael A. Gregory, Dawn P. Gill, Erin M. Shellington, Teresa Liu-Ambrose, Ryosuke Shigematsu, Guangyong Zou, Kevin Shoemaker, Adrian M. Owen, Vladimir Hachinski, Melanie Stuckey, Robert J. Petrella |
| Abstract |
Dementia is associated with cognitive and functional deficits, and poses a significant personal, societal, and economic burden. Directing interventions towards older adults with self-reported cognitive complaints may provide the greatest impact on dementia incidence and prevalence. Risk factors for cognitive and functional deficits are multifactorial in nature; many are cardiovascular disease risk factors and are lifestyle-mediated. Evidence suggests that multiple-modality exercise programs can provide cognitive and functional benefits that extend beyond what can be achieved from cognitive, aerobic, or resistance training alone, and preliminary evidence suggests that novel mind-motor interventions (i.e., Square Stepping Exercise; SSE) can benefit cognition and functional fitness. Nevertheless, it remains unclear whether multiple-modality exercise combined with mind-motor interventions can benefit diverse cognitive and functional outcomes in older adults with cognitive complaints. The Multiple-Modality, Mind-Motor (M4) study is a randomized controlled trial investigating the cognitive and functional impact of combined physical and cognitive training among community-dwelling adults with self-reported cognitive complaints who are 55 years of age or older. Participants are randomized to a Multiple-Modality and Mind-Motor (M4) intervention group or a Multiple-Modality (M2) comparison group. Participants exercise for 60 minutes/day, 3-days/week for 24 weeks and are assessed at baseline, 24 weeks and 52 weeks. The primary outcome is global cognitive function at 24 weeks, derived from the Cambridge Brain Sciences computerized cognitive battery. Secondary outcomes are: i) global cognitive function at 52 weeks; ii) domain-specific cognitive function at 24 and 52 weeks; iii) mobility (gait characteristics under single and dual-task conditions and balance); and 3) vascular health (blood pressure and carotid arterial measurements). We will analyze data based on an intent-to-treat approach, using mixed models for repeated measurements. The design features of the M4 trial and the methods included to address previous limitations within cognitive and exercise research will be discussed. Results from the M4 trial will provide evidence of combined multiple-modality and cognitive training among older adults with self-reported cognitive complaints on cognitive, mobility-related and vascular outcomes. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02136368 . |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 458 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 3 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 454 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 84 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 69 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 57 | 12% |
| Researcher | 31 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 29 | 6% |
| Other | 54 | 12% |
| Unknown | 134 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 78 | 17% |
| Sports and Recreations | 54 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 50 | 11% |
| Psychology | 47 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 30 | 7% |
| Other | 46 | 10% |
| Unknown | 153 | 33% |
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 18 January 2016.
All research outputs
#18,436,183
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#2,633
of 3,189 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,813
of 392,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#56
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,189 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 392,526 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.