ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2013
A standardized motor imagery introduction program (MIIP) for neuro-rehabilitation: development and evaluation.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Impact of neurologic deficits on motor imagery: a systematic review of clinical evaluations.Neuropsychology review · 2014Pooled it
- Actual and imagined music-cued gait training for people with multiple sclerosis: a multicentre qualitative study.BMJ open · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Dynamic Neuro-Cognitive Imagery Improves Mental Imagery Ability, Disease Severity, and Motor and Cognitive Functions in People with Parkinson's Disease.Neural plasticity · 2018Trial
- A commentary on Eaves et al. with a special focus on clinical neurorehabilitation.Psychological research · 2024Review
- Article
- Does Real-Time Feedback Affect Sensorimotor EEG Patterns in Routine Motor Imagery Practice?Brain sciences · 2021Article
- A different point of view: the evaluation of motor imagery perspectives in patients with sensorimotor impairments in a longitudinal study.BMC neurology · 2021Article
- Dynamic Neuro-Cognitive Imagery (DNIFrontiers in psychology · 2019Article
- Reliability and Validity of the Japanese Version of the Kinesthetic and Visual Imagery Questionnaire (KVIQ).Brain sciences · 2018Article
- Muscle Activation During Grasping With and Without Motor Imagery in Healthy Volunteers and Patients After Stroke or With Parkinson's Disease.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
- Exploring cued and non-cued motor imagery interventions in people with multiple sclerosis: a randomised feasibility trial and reliability study.Archives of physiotherapy · 2018Article
- [Neurofeedback-based motor imagery training for rehabilitation after stroke].Der Nervenarzt · 2016Review
- Functional Preservation and Reorganization of Brain during Motor Imagery in Patients with Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury: A Pilot fMRI Study.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2016Article
- Rhythmic cued motor imagery and walking in people with multiple sclerosis: a randomised controlled feasibility study.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2015Article
- Editorial: Mental practice: clinical and experimental research in imagery and action observation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2015Article
- Motor priming in neurorehabilitation.Journal of neurologic physical therapy : JNPT · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor patients with central nervous system (CNS) lesions and sensorimotor impairments a solid motor imagery (MI) introduction is crucial to understand and use MI to improve motor performance. The study's aim was to develop and evaluate a standardized MI group introduction program (MIIP) for patients after stroke, multiple sclerosis (MS), Parkinson's disease (PD), and traumatic brain injury (TBI).
methodsPhase 1: Based on literature a MIIP was developed comprising MI theory (definition, type, mode, perspective, planning) and MI practice (performance, control). Phase 2: Development of a 27-item self-administered MIIP evaluation questionnaire, assessing MI knowledge self-evaluation of the ability to perform MI and patient satisfaction with the MIIP. Phase 3: Evaluation of MIIP and MI questionnaire by 2 independent MI experts based on predefined criteria and 2 patients using semi-structured interviews. Phase 4: Case series with a pre-post design to evaluate MIIP (3 × 30 min) using the MI questionnaire, Imaprax, Kinaesthetic and Visual Imagery Questionnaire, and Mental Chronometry. The paired t-test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used to determine significant changes.
resultsData of eleven patients were analysed (5 females; age 62.3 ± 14.1 years). Declarative MI knowledge improved significantly from 5.4 ± 2.2 to 8.8 ± 2.9 (p = 0.010). Patients demonstrated good satisfaction with MIIP (mean satisfaction score: 83.2 ± 11.4%). MI ability remained on a high level but showed no significant change, except a significant decrease in the Kinaesthetic and Visual Imagery Questionnaire score.
conclusionThe presented MIIP seems to be valid and feasible for patients with CNS lesions and sensorimotor impairments resulting in improved MI knowledge. MIIP sessions can be held in groups of four or less. MI ability and Mental Chronometry remained unchanged after 3 training sessions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.