Trial reportClinical rehabilitation2020
Composite active range of motion (CX
Trial report in Clinical rehabilitation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- EEG-fMRI neurofeedback versus motor imagery after stroke, a randomized controlled trial.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Trial
- Reliability of the Five Step Assessment and Its Coefficients of Impairment in Spastic Paresis.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2025Article
- Case Report: Combination of focal vibration therapy and botulinum toxin injections to treat equinus gait in a child with unilateral spastic cerebral palsy.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2025Article
- Validity and reliability of the chronic composite XA, an upper limb motor assessment using Active Range of Motion in patients with chronic stroke.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2024Article
- Do Muscle Changes Contribute to the Neurological Disorder in Spastic Paresis?Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- When can maximal efficacy occur with repeat botulinum toxin injection in upper limb spastic paresis?Brain communications · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study is to evaluate a novel composite measure of active range of motion (X
designPost hoc analysis of two randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind studies with open-label extensions exploring changes in active function with abobotulinumtoxinA.
settingTertiary rehabilitation centers in Australia, Europe, and the United States. SUBJECTS: Adults with upper (
interventionsAbobotulinumtoxinA (⩽5 treatment cycles) in the upper or lower limb. MAIN MEASURES: X
resultsCX
conclusionCX
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.