ArticleInternational journal of rehabilitation research. Internationale Zeitschrift fur Rehabilitationsforschung. Revue internationale de recherches de readaptation2016
Bimanual dexterity assessment: validation of a revised form of the turning subtest from the Minnesota Dexterity Test.
Article in International journal of rehabilitation research. Internationale Zeitschrift fur Rehabilitationsforschung. Revue internationale de recherches de readaptation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03726385 (Investigation of the Effectiveness of Visual Feedback Training on Upper Extremity Functions), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
Investigation of the Effectiveness of Visual Feedback Training on Upper Extremity Functions
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application of systematic early rehabilitation training in patients undergoing primary neuroanastomosis and thumb opposition reconstruction due to complete median nerve laceration due to carpal injuries.Neurosurgical review · 2025Trial
- Functionality and Quality of Life with Parkinson's Disease after Use of a Dynamic Upper Limb Orthosis: A Pilot Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Trial
- Task-dependent muscle activation during functional upper-Limb tasks in adults with and without chronic non-specific neck pain: A cross-sectional study.Journal of back and musculoskeletal rehabilitation · 2026Observational
- Portable Touchscreen Assessment of Motor Skill: A Registered Report of the Reliability and Validity of EDNA MoTap.Assessment · 2025Article
- Case Report: Intensive multidisciplinary motor-cognitive rehabilitation treatment in Gerstmann-Sträussler-Scheinker syndrome.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2025Article
- Assessment of Upper Extremity Function in Multiple Sclerosis: Feasibility of a Digital Pinching Test.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Reversed Polarity bi-tDCS over M1 during a Five Days Motor Task Training Did Not Influence Motor Learning. A Triple-Blind Clinical Trial.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Assessment of training and selected factors on speed and quality of performing different tasks on the endoscopic simulator.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2021Article
- The Tyneside Pegboard Test: development, validation, and observations in unilateral cerebral palsy.Developmental medicine and child neurology · 2018Article
- Application and adaptation of the Virtual Eggs Test for assessing hand dexterity in subjects with stroke: a pilot study.Archives of physiotherapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bimanual coordination underlies many daily activities. It is tested by various versions of the old Minnesota Dexterity Test (dating back to 1931, 'turning' subtest). This, however, is ill standardized, may be time-consuming, and has poor normative data. A timed-revised form of the turning subtest (MTTrf) is presented. Age-related norms and test-retest reliability were computed. Sixty-four healthy individuals, 24-79 years, comprising 34 women, were required to pick up 60 small plastic disks from wells, rotate each disk, and transfer it to the other hand, which must replace it, as quickly as possible. Two trials were requested for each hand (ABBA sequence). The average time (seconds) across the 4 trials gave the test score. Participants were grouped (CART algorithm) into 3 statistically distinct (P<0.05) age×score strata, with cutoff 53+ and 73+ years, and tested at baseline and after 1 week. Test-retest reliability was measured both as consistency [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICCs) model 2.1] and as agreement (Bland-Altman plot). From the ICCs, the individual test-retest minimal real difference (in seconds) was computed. The whole MTTrf took less than 4 min to administer. Baseline scores ranged from 40 to 78 s. The ICCs ranged from 0.45 to 0.81 and the minimal real difference ranged from 6.68 to 13.40 s across the age groups. Fifty-nine out of 64 observations (92%) fell within the confidence limits of the Bland-Altman plot. The MTTrf is a reliable and practical test of bimanual coordination. It may be a useful addition to protocols of manual testing in occupational therapy.
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.