What's the perfect dose for practice to make perfect?

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. A randomized clinical trial in preterm infants on the effects of a home-based early intervention with the 'CareToy System'.PloS one · 2017
   Trial
2. Predicting Upper Limb Motor Impairment Recovery after Stroke: A Mixture Model.Annals of neurology · 2020
   Article
3. Stroke recovery and rehabilitation in 2016: a year in review of basic science and clinical science.Stroke and vascular neurology · 2017
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Dose response of task-specific upper limb training in people at least 6 months poststroke: A phase II, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial.2016

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.