ArticleArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2019
Absence of Motor-Evoked Potentials Does Not Predict Poor Recovery in Patients With Severe-Moderate Stroke: An Exploratory Analysis.
Article in Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation, 2019. 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- MEP Status is Not Predictive of Response to Upper Limb Training in People With Chronic, Moderate-Severe Hemiparesis Post-Stroke.Neurorehabilitation and neural repair · 2025Trial
- Brain computer interface training with motor imagery and functional electrical stimulation for patients with severe upper limb paresis after stroke: a randomized controlled pilot trial.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024Trial
- Effects of bihemispheric transcranial direct current stimulation on motor recovery in subacute stroke patients: a double-blind, randomized sham-controlled trial.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023Trial
- Neurophysiological Predictors of Proximal Motor Rehabilitation in Stroke Patients with Corticospinal Tract Damage.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- MEP-Guided Scalp Acupuncture Combined with Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Post-Stroke Upper Extremity Motor Impairment: A Randomized Controlled Study Protocol.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
- Identifying biomarkers related to motor function in chronic stroke: A fNIRS and TMS study.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2024Article
- Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation with task-oriented training improves upper extremity function in patients with subacute stroke: a randomized clinical trial.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- Article
- Stroke Recovery Is a Journey: Prediction and Potentials of Motor Recovery after a Stroke from a Practical Perspective.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Biomarkers for prognostic functional recovery poststroke: A narrative review.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022Review
- A novel perspective of associativity of upper limb motor impairment and cortical excitability in sub-acute and chronic stroke.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Cervicomedullary motor evoked responses in individuals with severe chronic hemiparesis post-stroke: a feasibility study.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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo better understand the role of the presence or absence of motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in predicting functional outcomes following a severe-moderate stroke.
designRetrospective exploratory analysis. We compared the effects of the stimulation condition (active or sham), MEP status (+ or -), and a combination of stimulation condition and MEP status on outcome. Within-group and between-group changes were assessed with longitudinal repeated measures analysis of variance and longitudinal repeated measures analysis of covariance, respectively. The proportions of participants who achieved minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for the main outcome measures were calculated.
settingUniversity research laboratory within a rehabilitation hospital.
participantsA total of 129 subjects with severe-moderate stroke-related motor impairments who participated in previous studies combining neuromodulation and motor training.
interventionsNeuromodulation (active or sham) and motor training.
main outcome measuresFugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) and Action Research Arm Test (ARAT).
resultsWhen participants were grouped by stimulation condition or MEP status, all groups improved from baseline to immediate postintervention and follow-up evaluations (all
conclusionAs expected, the MEP+ group had the greatest improvement in motor function. However, it was shown that individuals without MEPs can also achieve meaningful changes, as reflected by MCID, when neuromodulation is paired with motor training. To our knowledge, this is the first study to differentiate the effects of neuromodulation by MEP status.
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.