↓ Skip to main content

European study of research and development in mobility technology for persons with disabilities

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
European study of research and development in mobility technology for persons with disabilities
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, April 2012
DOI 10.1186/1743-0003-9-23
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brian Caulfield, Ted A Conway, Silvestro Micera

Abstract

\In the fall of 2010, the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health and the U.S. Veteran's Administration jointly supported a review of mobility technology in Europe. A delegation of American Scientists traveled to Europe to visit a number of research centers and engaged in a demonstration and dialogue related to the global state-of-the-art for mobility impairment rectification and augmentation. From the observations and exchanges between the U.S. delegation and host institutions, the researchers were able to derive a series of papers which are now published in this thematic series of Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation. The papers describe the main themes of the European mobility technology research activities showing a healthy picture of research and innovation in the field.

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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Belgium 1 3%
Unknown 31 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Researcher 5 16%
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 15 47%
Computer Science 3 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 6%
Neuroscience 2 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 4 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 21 April 2012.
All research outputs
#4,239,936
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#224
of 1,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,785
of 173,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,413 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 173,922 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.