↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Constraint‐induced movement therapy in the treatment of the upper limb in children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
165 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
250 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Constraint‐induced movement therapy in the treatment of the upper limb in children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2007
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004149.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brian J Hoare, Jason Wasiak, Christine Imms, Leeanne Carey

Abstract

Children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy learn strategies to manage daily tasks (for example play) using one hand and often the affected limb is disregarded or not used. Constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) is emerging as a treatment approach for use with children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy. It aims to increase spontaneous use of the affected upper limb and thereby limit the effects of developmental disregard. CIMT is based on two fundamental principles: constraint of the non-affected limb and massed practice of therapeutic tasks with the affected limb.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 250 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 242 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 47 19%
Student > Bachelor 43 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 11%
Researcher 25 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 6%
Other 49 20%
Unknown 45 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 80 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 52 21%
Neuroscience 14 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 4%
Social Sciences 9 4%
Other 32 13%
Unknown 53 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 October 2016.
All research outputs
#8,461,735
of 25,870,940 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9,544
of 13,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,100
of 88,685 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#39
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,870,940 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,151 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.2. 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 88,685 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.