Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30788609›Full record

ReviewCurrent neurology and neuroscience reports2019

Should We Care About Early Post-Stroke Rehabilitation? Not Yet, but Soon.

Steven R Zeiler

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current neurology and neuroscience reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04688970 (Personalized Neurorehabilitative Precision Medicine - From Data to Therapies), which is not on this map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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.

NCT04688970 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Personalized Neurorehabilitative Precision Medicine - From Data to Therapies

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity Hospital TuebingenRan2020 to 2022Enrolled500ConditionsStroke, Acute, Outcome, Improvement, Rehabilitation, Upper Extremity ParesisArmsno intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Steven R ZeilerDepartment of Neurology, Johns Hopkins, Phipps 443 600 N. Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA. sz@jhmi.edu.
Phipps Houses · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewStudies in humans and animal models show that most recovery from impairment occurs in the first 1-3 months after stroke as a result of both spontaneous recovery as well as increased responsiveness to enriched environments and training. Improvement from impairment is attributable to a short-lived "sensitive period" of post-stroke plasticity defined by unique genetic, physiological, and structural events. Unfortunately, rehabilitative interventions in humans have not been able to exploit this sensitive period similar to that seen in animal models. Here, we review these data and suggest a path forward. RECENT

findingsPre-clinical data reveal underlying mechanisms that define the post-stroke sensitive period. These data are then discussed in the context of the spontaneous post-stroke recovery described in humans. Future work will need to capitalize on unique interactions between the sensitive period, spontaneous recovery, and novel types of rehabilitative interventions.

Indexed as

AnimalsHumansNeuronal PlasticityRecovery of FunctionStrokeStroke RehabilitationEnriched environmentMotor recoveryNeurological rehabilitationSensitive periodSpontaneous recoveryStroke

Identifiers

PMID30788609
OpenAlexW2916055237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.