Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31122493›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Neurology2019

Safety and efficacy of co-careldopa as an add-on therapy to occupational and physical therapy in patients after stroke (DARS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Gary A Ford, Bipin B Bhakta, Alastair Cozens, Suzanne Hartley, Ivana Holloway, David Meads, John Pearn, Sharon Ruddock, Catherine M Sackley, Eirini-Christina Saloniki and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Neurology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 71 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Self-Organizing Recruitment of Compensatory Cortical Areas Post-Stroke Can Maximize Residual Motor Performance.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2026
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Gary A FordOxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. Electronic address: gary.ford@ouh.nhs.uk.
Bipin B BhaktaThe Academic Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Alastair CozensNHS Grampian, Aberdeen, UK.
Suzanne HartleyClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Ivana HollowayClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
David MeadsAcademic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
John PearnThe Academic Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Sharon RuddockClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Catherine M SackleySchool of Population and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Life Science and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
Eirini-Christina SalonikiCentre for Health Services Studies and Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.
Gillian SantorelliClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Marion F WalkerRehabilitation and Ageing, Queens Medical Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Amanda J FarrinClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
University of Leeds · GBKing's College London · GBNHS Grampian · GBNIHR Leeds Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit · GBOxford University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBQueen's Medical Centre · GBUniversity of Kent · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDopamine is a key modulator of striatal function and learning and might improve motor recovery after stroke. Previous small trials of dopamine agonists after stroke provide equivocal evidence of effectiveness on improving motor recovery. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of co-careldopa plus routine occupational and physical therapy during early rehabilitation after stroke.

methodsThis double-blind, multicentre, randomised controlled trial of co-careldopa versus placebo in addition to routine NHS occupational and physical therapy was done at 51 UK NHS acute inpatient stroke rehabilitation services. We recruited patients with new or recurrent clinically diagnosed ischaemic or haemorrhagic (excluding subarachnoid haemorrhage) stroke 5-42 days before randomisation, who were unable to walk 10 m or more, had a score of less than 7 points on the Rivermead Mobility Index, were expected to need rehabilitation, and were able to access rehabilitation after discharge from hospital. Participants were assigned (1:1) using stratified random blocks to receive 6 weeks of oral co-careldopa or matched placebo in addition to routine NHS physiotherapy and occupational therapy. The initial two doses of co-careldopa were 62·5 mg (50 mg of levodopa and 12·5 mg of carbidopa) and the remaining doses were 125 mg (100 mg of levodopa and 25 mg of carbidopa). Participants were required to take a single oral tablet 45-60 min before physiotherapy or occupational therapy session. The primary outcome was ability to walk independently, defined as a Rivermead Mobility Index score of 7 or more, at 8 weeks. Primary and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered on the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN99643613.

findingsBetween May 30, 2011, and March 28, 2014, of 1574 patients found eligible, 593 (mean age 68·5 years) were randomly assigned to either the co-careldopa group (n=308) or to the placebo group (n=285), on an average 18 days after stroke onset. Primary outcome data were available for all 593 patients. We found no evidence that the ability to walk independently improved with co-careldopa (125 [41%] of 308 patients) compared with placebo (127 [45%] of 285 patients; odds ratio 0·78 [95% CI 0·53-1·15]) at 8 weeks. Mortality at 12 months did not differ between the two groups (22 [7%] vs 17 [6%]). Serious adverse events were largely similar between groups. Vomiting during therapy sessions, after taking the study drug, was the most frequent adverse event and was more frequent in the co-careldopa group than the placebo group (19 [6·2%] vs 9 [3·2%]).

interpretationCo-careldopa in addition to routine occupational and physical therapy does not seem to improve walking after stroke. Further research might identify subgroups of patients with stroke who could benefit from dopaminergic therapy at different doses or times after stroke with more intensive motor therapy.

fundingMedical Research Council.

Indexed as

Physical Therapy ModalitiesAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBrain IschemiaCarbidopaDopamine AgentsDouble-Blind MethodDrug CombinationsFemaleHumansIntracranial HemorrhagesLevodopaMaleMiddle AgedMobility LimitationCarbidopacarbidopa, levodopa drug combinationDopamine AgentsDrug CombinationsLevodopa

Identifiers

PMID31122493
PMCPMC6527868
OpenAlexW2944942639

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.