ReviewDer Nervenarzt2016
[Evidence-based rehabilitation of mobility after stroke].
Review in Der Nervenarzt, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Motivation in motor training interventions after stroke-a systematic review.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Review
- Article
- [New aspects of neurorehabilitation: motor and language].Der Nervenarzt · 2016Review
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
backgroundApproximately two thirds of stroke patients initially suffer from at least impaired mobility. Various rehabilitation concepts have been proposed.
objectiveBased on the current literature, which rehabilitation methods can be recommended for improvement of gait, gait velocity, gait distance and balance?
methodsA systematic literature search was carried out for randomized clinical studies and reviews with clinically relevant outcome variables. Formulation of recommendations, separated for target variables and time after stroke.
resultsRestoration and improvement of gait function relies on a high number of repetitions of gait movements, which for more severely affected patients is preferentially machine-based. For improvement of gait velocity for less severely affected patients intensive gait training does not necessarily rely on mechanical support. Gait distance can be improved by aerobic endurance exercises with a cardiovascular effect, which have to be performed in a functional context. Improvement of balance should be achieved by intensive functional gait training. Additional stimulation techniques are only effective when included in a functionally relevant training program. DISCUSSION: These guidelines not only provide recommendations for action but also provide pathophysiological insights into functional restoration of stance and gait after stroke.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27531212What 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.