↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Beneficial effects of multisensory and cognitive stimulation in institutionalized elderly: 12-months follow-up

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • 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
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 Mendeley
Title
Beneficial effects of multisensory and cognitive stimulation in institutionalized elderly: 12-months follow-up
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, August 2015
DOI 10.2147/cia.s80997
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liliane Dias E Dias de Macedo, Thaís Cristina Galdino De Oliveira, Fernanda Cabral Soares, João Bento-Torres, Natáli Valim Oliver Bento-Torres, Daniel Clive Anthony, Cristovam Wanderley Picanço-Diniz

Abstract

We previously demonstrated the beneficial effects of a multisensory and cognitive stimulation program, consisting of 48 sessions, twice a week, to improve the cognition of elderly subjects living either in long-term care institutions (institutionalized - I) or in communities with their families (noninstitutionalized - NI). In the present study, we evaluated these subjects after the end of the intervention and compared the rate of age-related cognitive decline of those living in an enriched community environment (NI group, n=15, 74.1±3.9 years old) with those living in the impoverished environment of long-term care institutions (I group, n=20, 75.1±6.8 years old). Both groups participated fully in our stimulation program. Over 1 year, we conducted revaluations at five time points (2 months, 4 months, 6 months, 8 months, and 12 months) after the completion of the intervention. Both elderly groups were evaluated with the mini-mental state examination and selected language tests. Progressive cognitive decline was observed in both groups over the period. Indeed, it took only 4-6 months after the end of the stimulation program for significant reductions in language test scores to become apparent. However, earlier reductions in test scores were mainly associated with I group, and linguistic prosody test scores were significantly affected by institutionalization and time, two variables that interacted and reduced these scores. Moreover, I group reduced the Montréal cognitive assessment battery language tests scores 4 months before NI group. It remains to be investigated what mechanisms may explain the earlier and more intense language losses in institutionalized elderly.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 82 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 11 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Professor 6 7%
Other 16 19%
Unknown 19 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 20%
Psychology 16 19%
Social Sciences 7 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 8%
Neuroscience 6 7%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 22 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 20 April 2016.
All research outputs
#16,721,717
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#1,182
of 1,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,918
of 276,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#26
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 276,425 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.