Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31187191›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurology2019

Accelerometry for remote monitoring of physical activity in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a longitudinal cohort study.

Ruben P A van Eijk, Jaap N E Bakers, Tommy M Bunte, Arianne J de Fockert, Marinus J C Eijkemans, Leonard H van den Berg

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.2field-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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. The use of digital tools in rare neurological diseases towards a new care model: a narrative review.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ruben P A van EijkDepartment of Neurology, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7132-5967
Jaap N E BakersDepartment of Rehabilitation, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Tommy M BunteDepartment of Neurology, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Arianne J de FockertDepartment of Neurology, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Marinus J C EijkemansBiostatistics and Research Support, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Leonard H van den BergDepartment of Neurology, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands. lberg@umcutrecht.nl.
Heidelberg University · DEUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NL

Funding

The Netherlands ALS Foundation TryMe
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe extensive heterogeneity between patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) complicates the quantification of disease progression. In this study, we determine the value of remote, accelerometer-based monitoring of physical activity in patients with ALS.

methodsThis longitudinal cohort study was conducted in a home-based setting; all study materials were sent by mail. Patients wore the ActiGraph during waking hours for 7 days every 2-3 months and provided information regarding their daily functioning (ALSFRS-R). We defined four accelerometer-based endpoints that either reflect the average daily activity or quantify the patient's physical capacity.

resultsA total of 42 patients participated; the total valid monitoring period was 9288 h with a 93.0% adherence rate. At baseline, patients were active 27.9% (range 11.6-52.4%) of their time; this declined by 0.64% (95% 0.43-0.86, p < 0.001) per month. Accelerometer-based endpoints were strongly associated with the ALSFRS-R (r 0.78, 95% CI 0.63-0.92, p < 0.001), but showed less variability over time than the ALSFRS-R (coefficient of variation 0.64-0.81 vs. 1.06, respectively). Accelerometer-based endpoints could reduce sample size by 30.3% for 12-month trials and 44.6% for 18-month trials; for trials lasting less than 9 months, the ALSFRS-R resulted in smaller sample sizes.

conclusionAccelerometry is an objective method for quantifying disease progression, which could obtain real-world insights in the patient's physical functioning and may personalize the delivery of care. In addition, remote monitoring provides patients with the opportunity to participate in clinical trials from home, paving the way to a patient-centric clinical trial model.

Indexed as

Disease ProgressionExerciseAccelerometryAgedAmyotrophic Lateral SclerosisFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, AmbulatoryReproducibility of ResultsAccelerometryAmyotrophic lateral sclerosisClinical trialLongitudinal cohort study

Identifiers

PMID31187191
PMCPMC6765690
OpenAlexW2951697757

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.