ReviewTranslational stroke research2016
Translational Hurdles in Stroke Recovery Studies.
Review in Translational stroke research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
34 citing papers in PubMed.
- MEP Status is Not Predictive of Response to Upper Limb Training in People With Chronic, Moderate-Severe Hemiparesis Post-Stroke.Neurorehabilitation and neural repair · 2025Trial
- Effect of Virtual Reality Gait Training on Participation in Survivors of Subacute Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Physical therapy · 2021Trial
- Postpartum Plasma-Derived Exosomes Confer Mitochondrial Stabilization and Neuroprotection against Ischemic Stroke.Research square · 2026Article
- Imatinib attenuates neurobehavioral deficits and hippocampal neuronal damage after global cerebral ischemia in gerbils.Indian journal of pharmacology · 2025Article
- The Aging Immune System: A Critical Attack on Ischemic Stroke.Molecular neurobiology · 2025Review
- Advanced rehabilitation in ischaemic stroke research.Stroke and vascular neurology · 2024Review
- Neuroimaging biomarkers for predicting stroke outcomes: A systematic review.Health science reports · 2024Review
- Control intervention design for preclinical and clinical trials: Consensus-based core recommendations from the third Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2024Article
- Control intervention design for preclinical and clinical trials: Consensus-based core recommendations from the third Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable.Neurorehabilitation and neural repair · 2024Article
- Shoulder Joint Hybrid Assistive Limb Treatment for Chronic Stroke Patients with Upper Limb Dysfunction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Cerebral ischemia in the developing brain.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2022Review
- LFP Analysis of Brain Injured Anesthetized Animals Undergoing Closed-Loop Intracortical Stimulation.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2022Article
- The Gliopeptide ODN, a Ligand for the Benzodiazepine Site of GABAThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021Article
- Clinical Use of Surface Electromyography to Track Acute Upper Extremity Muscle Recovery after Stroke: A Descriptive Case Study of a Single Patient.Applied system innovation · 2021Article
- Exosome-mediated amplification of endogenous brain repair mechanisms and brain and systemic organ interaction in modulating neurological outcome after stroke.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2018Review
- Angiopoietin-1 Mimetic Peptide Promotes Neuroprotection after Stroke in Type 1 Diabetic Rats.Cell transplantation · 2018Article
- Cell Therapy in Stroke-Cautious Steps Towards a Clinical Treatment.Translational stroke research · 2018Review
- Cell-based and pharmacological neurorestorative therapies for ischemic stroke.Neuropharmacology · 2018Review
- Review
- Data Standardization and Quality Management.Translational stroke research · 2018Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Emerging understanding of brain plasticity has opened new avenues for the treatment of stroke. The promising preclinical evidence with neuroprotective drugs has not been confirmed in clinical trials, thus nowadays, researchers, pharmaceutical companies, and funding bodies hesitate to initiate these expensive trials with restorative therapies. Since many of the previous failures can be traced to low study quality, a number of guidelines such as STAIR and STEPS were introduced to rectify these shortcomings. However, these guidelines stem from the study design for neuroprotective drugs and one may question whether they are appropriate for restorative approaches, which rely heavily on behavioral testing. Most of the recovery studies conducted in stroke patients have been small-scale, proof-of-concept trials. Consequently, the overall effect sizes of pooled phase II trials have proved unreliable and unstable in most meta-analyses. Although the methodological quality of trials in humans is improving, most studies still suffer from methodological flaws and do not meet even the minimum of evidence-based standards for reporting randomized controlled trials. The power problem of most phase II trials is mostly attributable to a lack of proper stratification with robust prognostic factors at baseline as well as the incorrect assumption that all patients will exhibit the same proportional amount of spontaneous neurological recovery poststroke. In addition, most trials suffer from insufficient treatment contrasts between the experimental and control arm and the outcomes have not been sufficiently responsive to detect small but clinically relevant changes in neurological impairments and activities. This narrative review describes the main factors that bias recovery studies, both in experimental animals and stroke patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27000881What 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.