ArticleNeural plasticity2020
Does Measurement of Corticospinal Tract Involvement Add Value to Clinical Behavioral Biomarkers in Predicting Motor Recovery after Stroke?
Article in Neural plasticity, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence of neuroplasticity with robotic hand exoskeleton for post-stroke rehabilitation: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2021Trial
- Effectiveness of Rehabilitation Nursing versus Usual Therapist-Led Treatment in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Randomized Non-Inferiority Trial.Clinical interventions in aging · 2021Trial
- Different Brain Network Connectomic Relationships Subserve Hand Dexterity During Task Versus Resting States in People with Brain Tumors.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Predicting response to non-invasive brain stimulation in post-stroke upper extremity motor impairment: the importance of neurophysiological and clinical biomarkers.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025Article
- Somatosensory-Thalamic Functional Dysconnectivity Associated With Poststroke Motor Function Rehabilitation: A Resting-State fMRI Study.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Performance-Based Robotic Training in Individuals with Subacute Stroke: Differences between Responders and Non-Responders.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- DTI-ALPS: An MR biomarker for motor dysfunction in patients with subacute ischemic stroke.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Neuroimaging Techniques as Potential Tools for Assessment of Angiogenesis and Neuroplasticity Processes after Stroke and Their Clinical Implications for Rehabilitation and Stroke Recovery Prognosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Effect of rTMS intervention on upper limb motor function after stroke: A study based on fNIRS.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Article
- Neuromechanical Biomarkers for Robotic Neurorehabilitation.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2021Review
- A Case Report: Effect of Robotic Exoskeleton Based Therapy on Neurological and Functional Recovery of a Patient With Chronic Stroke.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Lateralized glymphatic system impairment in acute ischemic stroke: a DTI-ALPS study of upper limb motor function.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The prediction of motor recovery after stroke is an important issue, and various prediction models have been proposed using either clinical behavioral or neurological biomarkers. This study sought to identify the effects of clinical behavioral biomarkers combined with corticospinal tract (CST) injury measurement on the prediction of motor recovery after stroke. Methods: The region of interest was drawn on the normalized brain magnetic resonance imaging scans of patients with first-ever unilateral hemispheric stroke, and the degree of CST injury was calculated in a total of 67 such subjects. Patients who had initial minor deficits and showed a ceiling effect on motor recovery were excluded. To predict the follow-up Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA) scores, correlation and regression analyses were performed using various clinical behavioral biomarkers, including age, sex, lesion location, and initial FMA scores and CST injury measurements. Results: Only the initial FMA-upper extremity (UE) score was statistically correlated with the follow-up FMA-UE score at ≥2 months after the onset (adjusted Conclusions: Motor recovery of the upper and lower extremities after stroke could be predicted using the initial FMA score. CST injury was significant for the prediction of motor recovery of the upper extremity in patients with severe initial motor deficits (FMA-UE < 35); however, its portion of prediction of motor recovery was low. The prediction of poststroke motor recovery using the initial motor deficit was not improved by the addition of CST injury measurements.
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.