Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27609062›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2016

Model-based variables for the kinematic assessment of upper-extremity impairments in post-stroke patients.

Alessandro Panarese, Elvira Pirondini, Peppino Tropea, Benedetta Cesqui, Federico Posteraro, Silvestro Micera

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Alessandro PanareseThe BioRobotics Institute, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Viale R. Piaggio 34, 56025, Pontedera, Pisa, Italy. a.panarese@sssup.it.
Elvira PirondiniBertarelli Foundation Chair in Translational Neuroengineering, Center for Neuroprosthetics and Institute of Bioengineering, School of Engineering, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland. elvira.pirondini@epfl.ch.
Peppino TropeaThe BioRobotics Institute, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Viale R. Piaggio 34, 56025, Pontedera, Pisa, Italy.
Benedetta CesquiCentre of Space Bio-medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.
Federico PosteraroRehabilitation Department Versilia Hospital, AUSL 12, Viareggio, Italy.
Silvestro MiceraThe BioRobotics Institute, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Viale R. Piaggio 34, 56025, Pontedera, Pisa, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCommon scales for clinical evaluation of post-stroke upper-limb motor recovery are often complemented with kinematic parameters extracted from movement trajectories. However, there is no a general consensus on which parameters to use. Moreover, the selected variables may be redundant and highly correlated or, conversely, may incompletely sample the kinematic information from the trajectories. Here we sought to identify a set of clinically useful variables for an exhaustive but yet economical kinematic characterization of upper limb movements performed by post-stroke hemiparetic subjects.

methodsFor this purpose, we pursued a top-down model-driven approach, seeking which kinematic parameters were pivotal for a computational model to generate trajectories of point-to-point planar movements similar to those made by post-stroke subjects at different levels of impairment.

resultsThe set of kinematic variables used in the model allowed for the generation of trajectories significantly similar to those of either sub-acute or chronic post-stroke patients at different time points during the therapy. Simulated trajectories also correctly reproduced many kinematic features of real movements, as assessed by an extensive set of kinematic metrics computed on both real and simulated curves. When inspected for redundancy, we found that variations in the variables used in the model were explained by three different underlying and unobserved factors related to movement efficiency, speed, and accuracy, possibly revealing different working mechanisms of recovery.

conclusionThis study identified a set of measures capable of extensively characterizing the kinematics of upper limb movements performed by post-stroke subjects and of tracking changes of different motor improvement aspects throughout the rehabilitation process.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationAdultAgedBiomechanical PhenomenaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMovementStrokeStroke RehabilitationUpper ExtremityKinematicsModelingRobotic rehabilitationStroke

Identifiers

PMID27609062
PMCPMC5016877

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.