ReviewJournal of physical therapy science2016
Kinematic upper limb evaluation of children and adolescents with cerebral palsy: a systematic review of the literature.
Review in Journal of physical therapy science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Measuring upper limb function in children with hemiparesis with 3D inertial sensors.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2017Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
[Purpose] The aim of the present study was to perform a review of the literature on objective measures of upper limb movements in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy and describe the methods used to investigate upper limb kinematics in this population. [Materials and Methods] An extensive database search was performed using the keywords kinematics, upper limb, and cerebral palsy. A total of 146 papers were identified, but only five met the inclusion criteria. [Results] No consensus was found regarding the data collection, processing, and analysis procedures or reporting of the results. [Conclusion] Standardization of the protocol for 3D upper limb movement analysis will provide the foundation for comparable, reproducible results and eventually facilitate the planning of treatment interventions.
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.