Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31120910›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2019

Comparison of bilateral and unilateral upper limb training in people with stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Pei-Ming Chen, Patrick W H Kwong, Claudia K Y Lai, Shamay S M Ng

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. The modulatory effects of bilateral arm training (BAT) on the brain in stroke patients: a systematic review.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2021
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Applications of Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (fNIRS) Neuroimaging During Rehabilitation Following Stroke: A Review.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pei-Ming ChenDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China (SAR).
Patrick W H KwongDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China (SAR).
Claudia K Y LaiSchool of Nursing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China (SAR).
Shamay S M NgDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China (SAR).ORCID 0000-0003-1660-0548
Hong Kong Polytechnic University · HK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesBilateral upper limb training (BULT) and unilateral upper limb training (UULT) are two effective strategies for the recovery of upper limb motor function after stroke. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the improvements in motor impairment and functional performances of people with stroke after BULT and UULT. RESEARCH DESIGN AND

methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis identified 21 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the eligibility criteria from CINAHL, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and PubMed. The outcome measures were the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT), Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) and Box and Block Test (BBT), which are validated measures of upper limb function.

resultsTwenty-one studies involving 842 subjects with stroke were included. Compared with UULT, BULT yielded a significantly greater mean difference (MD) in the FMA-UE (MD = 2.21, 95% Confidence Interval (CI), 0.12 to 4.30, p = 0.04; I2 = 86%, p<0.001). However, a comparison of BULT and UULT yielded insignificant mean difference (MD) in terms of the time required to complete the WMFT (MD = 0.44; 95%CI, -2.22 to 3.10, p = 0.75; I2 = 55%, p = 0.06) and standard mean difference (SMD) in terms of the functional ability scores on the WMFT, ARAT and BBT (SMD = 0.25; 95%CI, -0.02 to 0.52, p = 0.07; I2 = 54%, p = 0.02). DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Compared to UULT, BULT yielded superior improvements in the improving motor impairment of people with stroke, as measured by the FMA-UE. However, these strategies did not yield significant differences in terms of the functional performance of people with stroke, as measured by the WMFT, ARAT and BBT. More comparative studies of the effects of BULT and UULT are needed to increase the reliability of these conclusions.

Indexed as

HumansPhysical Therapy ModalitiesPsychomotor DisordersRecovery of FunctionStroke RehabilitationTeachingUpper Extremity

Identifiers

PMID31120910
PMCPMC6532847
OpenAlexW2946009129

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.