ArticleProgress in rehabilitation medicine2020
Direction-specific Disruption of Paretic Arm Movement in Post-stroke Patients.
Article in Progress in rehabilitation medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Kinematic analysis of upper limb coordination during a multi-directional reaching task: specific examination of shoulder girdle movement.Journal of physical therapy science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to characterize reaching movements of the paretic arm in different directions within the reachable workspace in post-stroke patients.
methodsA total of 12 post-stroke patients participated in this study. Each held a ball with a tracking marker and performed back-and-forth reaching movements from near the middle of the body to one of two targets in front of them located on the ipsilateral and contralateral sides of the arm performing the movement. We recorded and analyzed the trajectories of the tracking marker. The stability of arm movements was evaluated using areas and minimum Feret diameters to assess the trajectories of both the paretic and non-paretic arms. The speed of the arm movement was also calculated.
resultsFor the paretic arm, contralateral movement was more impaired than ipsilateral movement, whereas for the non-paretic arm, no difference was observed between the directions. The maximum speed of the contralateral movement was significantly slower than that of the ipsilateral movement in both the paretic and non-paretic arms.
conclusionThe paretic arm shows direction-specific instability in movement toward the contralateral side of the arm.
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.