Background: Over the past decade, many studies in the field of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in stroke have been published in scholarly journals. However, a scientometric analysis focusing on tDCS after stroke is still missing. The purpose of this study is to deliver a bibliometric analysis to investigate the global hotspots and frontiers in the domain of tDCS in stroke from 2012 to 2021. Methods: Articles and reviews related to tDCS in stroke were retrieved and obtained from the Web of Science core collection database from 2012 to 2021. Data visualization and analysis were conducted by using CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Microsoft Excel 2019. Results: Finally, 371 publications were included in the scientometric analysis, including 288 articles and 83 reviews. The results showed that the number of publications per year increased from 15 to 68 in the last 10 years. Neurosciences was the main research hotspot category (n = 201). Frontiers in Human Neuroscience was the most published journal with 14 papers. The most productive author, institution, and country were Fregni F (n = 13), the League of European Research Universities (n = 37), and the United States of America (n = 98), respectively. A burstness analysis of keywords and the literature indicated that current studies in the field of tDCS in stroke focused on poststroke aphasia, tDCS combined with robotic therapy, and anatomical parameters. Conclusion: The research of tDCS in stroke is predicted to remain a research hotspot in the future. We recommend investigating the curative effect of other different tDCS closed-loop rehabilitation methods for different stroke dysfunctions. In conclusion, this bibliometric study presented the hotspots and trends of tDCS in stroke over the last decade, which may help researchers manage their further studies.
Facial palsy would lead to a series of physical and mental problems, as facial function plays an important role in various aspects of daily life. However, the current strategies for evaluating facial function relied heavily on raters and the results varied from the experience of raters. Thus, an objective and accurate facial evaluation system is always claimed. In this study, a customized automatical facial evaluation system (AFES) was proposed, which might have the potential to be employed as an adjunctive and efficient assessing method in clinic. In order to investigate the feasibility of AFES, ninety-two participants with facial palsy were recruited and received scalebased subjective manual evaluation (including mHBGS and mSFGS) and objective automatical evaluation of AFES (including aHBGS, aSFGS and indicators of facial regional features) at enrollment and after two weeks. The correlations between the results of the two methods were analyzed and the participants were stratified according to the severity of facial function for further analyses. Strong
Background A serious game–based cellphone augmented reality system (CARS) was developed for rehabilitation of stroke survivors, which is portable, convenient, and suitable for self-training. Objective This study aims to examine the effectiveness of CARS in improving upper limb motor function and cognitive function of stroke survivors via conducting a long-term randomized controlled trial and analyze the patient’s acceptance of the proposed system. Methods A double-blind randomized controlled trial was performed with 30 poststroke, subacute phase patients. All patients in both the experimental group (n=15) and the control group (n=15) performed a 1-hour session of therapy each day, 5 days per week for 2 weeks. Patients in the experimental group received 30 minutes of rehabilitation training with CARS and 30 minutes of conventional occupational therapy (OT) each session, while patients in the control group received conventional OT for the full 1 hour each session. The Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) subscale, Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), manual muscle test and Brunnstrom stage were used to assess motor function; the Mini-Mental State Examination, Add VS Sub, and Stroop Game were used to assess cognitive function; and the Barthel index was used to assess activities of daily living before and after the 2-week treatment period. In addition, the User Satisfaction Evaluation Questionnaire was used to reflect the patients’ adoption of the system in the experimental group after the final intervention. Results All the assessment scores of the experimental group and control group were significantly improved after intervention. After the intervention. The experimental group’s FMA-UE and ARAT scores increased by 11.47 and 5.86, respectively, and were both significantly higher than the increase of the control group. Similarly, the score of the Add VS Sub and Stroop Game in the experimental group increased by 7.53 and 6.83, respectively, after the intervention, which also represented a higher increase than that in the control group. The evaluation of the adoption of this system had 3 sub-dimensions. In terms of accessibility, the patients reported a mean score of 4.27 (SD 0.704) for the enjoyment of their experience with the system, a mean 4.33 (SD 0.816) for success in using the system, and a mean 4.67 (SD 0.617) for the ability to control the system. In terms of comfort, the patients reported a mean 4.40 (SD 0.737) for the clarity of information provided by the system and a mean 4.40 (SD 0.632) for comfort. In terms of acceptability, the patients reported a mean 4.27 (SD 0.884) for usefulness in their rehabilitation and a mean 4.67 (0.617) in agreeing that CARS is a suitable tool for home-based rehabilitation. Conclusions The rehabilitation based on combined CARS and conventional OT was more effective in improving both upper limb motor function and cognitive function than was conventional OT. Due to the low cost and ease of use, CARS is also potentially suitable for home-based rehabilitation. Trial Registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR1800017568; https://tinyurl.com/xbkkyfyz
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.