Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25100036›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2014

Automated assessment of upper extremity movement impairment due to stroke.

Erienne V Olesh, Sergiy Yakovenko, Valeriya Gritsenko

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 116 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Neural Networks-Based Approach to Solve Inverse Kinematics Problems for Medical Applications.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Data-Driven Quantitation of Movement Abnormality after Stroke.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Erienne V OleshDivision of Physical Therapy, School of Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America.
Sergiy YakovenkoDivision of Exercise Physiology, School of Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America.
Valeriya GritsenkoDivision of Physical Therapy, School of Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America.
West Virginia University · US

Funding

Research Training Program in the Behavioral and Biomedical SciencesT32GM081741 · NIGMS · WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY · PI BERREBI, ALBERT S, SIMPKINS, JAMES W. · 2008 to 2018
$2.1M
Intramural NIH HHSNIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM081741
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current diagnosis and treatment of movement impairment post-stroke is based on the subjective assessment of select movements by a trained clinical specialist. However, modern low-cost motion capture technology allows for the development of automated quantitative assessment of motor impairment. Such outcome measures are crucial for advancing post-stroke treatment methods. We sought to develop an automated method of measuring the quality of movement in clinically-relevant terms from low-cost motion capture. Unconstrained movements of upper extremity were performed by people with chronic hemiparesis and recorded by standard and low-cost motion capture systems. Quantitative scores derived from motion capture were compared to qualitative clinical scores produced by trained human raters. A strong linear relationship was found between qualitative scores and quantitative scores derived from both standard and low-cost motion capture. Performance of the automated scoring algorithm was matched by averaged qualitative scores of three human raters. We conclude that low-cost motion capture combined with an automated scoring algorithm is a feasible method to assess objectively upper-arm impairment post stroke. The application of this technology may not only reduce the cost of assessment of post-stroke movement impairment, but also promote the acceptance of objective impairment measures into routine medical practice.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsMovementAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedParesisStrokeUpper Extremity

Identifiers

PMID25100036
PMCPMC4123984
OpenAlexW2103142570

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.