Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33168030›Full record

SynthesisBiomedical engineering online2020

Objective assessment of spasticity by pendulum test: a systematic review on methods of implementation and outcome measures.

Fariborz Rahimi, Reza Eyvazpour, Nazila Salahshour, Mahmood Reza Azghani

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Biomedical engineering online, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A portable system to measure knee extensor spasticity after spinal cord injury.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Fariborz RahimiDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Bonab, 5551761167, Bonab, East Azerbaijan, Iran. frahimi@ubonab.ac.ir.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6689-8210
Reza EyvazpourDepartment of Electronics, Faculty of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran.
Nazila SalahshourDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Bonab, 5551761167, Bonab, East Azerbaijan, Iran.
Mahmood Reza AzghaniDepartment of Biomechanical Engineering, Faculty of Biomedical Engineering, Sahand University of Technology, Tabriz, Iran.
University of Bonab · IRSahand University of Technology · IRUniversity of Tabriz · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInstrumented pendulum test is an objective and repeatable biomechanical method of assessment for spasticity. However, multitude of sensor technologies and plenty of suggested outcome measures, confuse those interested in implementing this method in practice. Lack of a standard agreement on the definition of experimental setup and outcome measures adds to this ambiguity and causes the results of one study not to be directly attainable by a group that uses a different setup. In this systematic review of studies, we aim to reduce the confusion by providing pros and cons of the available choices, and also by standardizing the definitions.

methodsA literature search was conducted for the period of 1950 to the end of 2019 on PubMed, Science Direct, Google Scholar and IEEE explore; with keywords of "pendulum test" and "Spasticity".

resultsTwenty-eight studies with instrumented pendulum test for assessment of spasticity met the inclusion criteria. All the suggested methods of implementation were compared and advantages and disadvantages were provided for each sensor technology. An exhaustive list categorized outcome measures in three groups of angle-based, angular velocity-based, and angular acceleration-based measures with all different names and definitions.

conclusionsWith the aim of providing standardized methodology with replicable and comparable results, sources of dissimilarity and ambiguity among research strategies were found and explained with the help of graphical representation of pendulum movement stages and corresponding parameters on the angular waveforms. We hope using the provided tables simplify the choices when implementing pendulum test for spasticity evaluation, improve the consistency when reporting the results, and disambiguate inconsistency in the literature.

Indexed as

Mechanical PhenomenaMuscle SpasticityBiomechanical PhenomenaHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareObjective assessmentOutcome measureSpasticityWartenberg pendulum test

Identifiers

PMID33168030
PMCPMC7653760
OpenAlexW3103326060

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.