Trial reportPhysical therapy2021
Implicit and Explicit Motor Learning Interventions Have Similar Effects on Walking Speed in People After Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Physical therapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implicit learning provides advantage over explicit learning for gait-cognitive dual-task interference.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- Sequential gait interventions reveal non-reciprocal transfer between instructional and sensorimotor adaptation mechanisms.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Home-Based Gait Interventions for Adults with Stroke: A Scoping Review.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2025Review
- Overview of Effects of Motor Learning Strategies in Neurologic and Geriatric Populations: A Systematic Mapping Review.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2024Review
- Safe(r) Landing by Older People: A Matter of Complexity.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2024Review
- A kinematically complex multi-articular motor skill for investigating implicit motor learning.Psychological research · 2024Article
- Implicit Motor Learning Strategies Benefit Dual-Task Performance in Patients with Stroke.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveClinicians may use implicit or explicit motor learning approaches to facilitate motor learning of patients with stroke. Implicit motor learning approaches have shown promising results in healthy populations. The purpose of this study was to assess whether an implicit motor learning walking intervention is more effective compared with an explicit motor learning walking intervention delivered at home regarding walking speed in people after stroke in the chronic phase of recovery.
methodsThis randomized, controlled, single-blind trial was conducted in the home environment. The 79 participants, who were in the chronic phase after stroke (age = 66.4 [SD = 11.0] years; time poststroke = 70.1 [SD = 64.3] months; walking speed = 0.7 [SD = 0.3] m/s; Berg Balance Scale score = 44.5 [SD = 9.5]), were randomly assigned to an implicit (n = 38) or explicit (n = 41) group. Analogy learning was used as the implicit motor learning walking intervention, whereas the explicit motor learning walking intervention consisted of detailed verbal instructions. Both groups received 9 training sessions (30 minutes each), for a period of 3 weeks, targeted at improving quality of walking. The primary outcome was walking speed measured by the 10-Meter Walk Test at a comfortable walking pace. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, immediately after intervention, and 1 month postintervention.
resultsNo statistically or clinically relevant differences between groups were obtained postintervention (between-group difference was estimated at 0.02 m/s [95% CI = -0.04 to 0.08] and at follow-up (between-group difference estimated at -0.02 m/s [95% CI = -0.09 to 0.05]).
conclusionImplicit motor learning was not superior to explicit motor learning to improve walking speed in people after stroke in the chronic phase of recovery. IMPACT: To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the effects of implicit compared with explicit motor learning on a functional task in people after stroke. Results indicate that physical therapists can use (tailored) implicit and explicit motor learning strategies to improve walking speed in people after stroke who are in the chronic phase of recovery.
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.