↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Gross and fine motor function in fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, February 2017
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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
Gross and fine motor function in fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, February 2017
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s127038
Pubmed ID
Authors

Omid Rasouli, Egil A Fors, Petter Chr Borchgrevink, Fredrik Öhberg, Ann-Katrin Stensdotter

Abstract

This paper aimed to investigate motor proficiency in fine and gross motor function, with a focus on reaction time (RT) and movement skill, in patients with fibromyalgia (FM) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) compared to healthy controls (HC). A total of 60 individuals (20 CFS, 20 FM, and 20 HC), age 19-49 years, participated in this study. Gross motor function in the lower extremity was assessed using a RT task during gait initiation in response to an auditory trigger. Fine motor function in the upper extremity was measured during a precision task (the Purdue Pegboard test) where the number of pins inserted within 30 s was counted. No significant differences were found between FM and CFS in any parameters. FM and CFS groups had significantly longer RT than HC in the gait initiation (p=0.001, and p=0.004 respectively). In the Purdue Pegboard test, 20% in the FM group, 15% in the CFS groups, and 0% of HC group, scored below the threshold of the accepted performance. However, there were no significant differences between FM, CFS, and HC in this task (p=0.12). Compared to controls, both CFS and FM groups displayed significantly longer RT in the gait initiation task. Generally, FM patients showed the worst results in both tests, although no group differences were found in fine motor control, according to the Purdue Pegboard test.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Other 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 15 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 19%
Sports and Recreations 7 12%
Psychology 7 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 18 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 16 April 2017.
All research outputs
#3,029,838
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#336
of 1,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,778
of 426,137 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#10
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,969 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 426,137 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.