Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33568550›Full record

ArticleNeurology2021

Publication Rate and Consistency of Registered Trials of Motor-Based Stroke Rehabilitation.

Raabeae Aryan, David Jagroop, Cynthia J Danells, Gabriela Rozanski, Janelle Unger, Andrew H Huntley, Avril Mansfield

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neurology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Time to publication for results of clinical trials.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Observational
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

7 authors.

Raabeae AryanFrom the Rehabilitation Sciences Institute (R.A., J.U.), University of Toronto; Toronto Rehabilitation Institute-University Health Network (R.A., D.J., C.J.D., G.R., J.U., A.H.H., A.M.); Department of Physical Therapy (C.J.D., A.M.), University of Toronto; School of Physical Therapy (J.U.), Faculty of Health Sciences, Western University, London; and Evaluative Clinical Sciences (A.M.), Hurvitz Brain Sciences Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7959-2704
David JagroopFrom the Rehabilitation Sciences Institute (R.A., J.U.), University of Toronto; Toronto Rehabilitation Institute-University Health Network (R.A., D.J., C.J.D., G.R., J.U., A.H.H., A.M.); Department of Physical Therapy (C.J.D., A.M.), University of Toronto; School of Physical Therapy (J.U.), Faculty of Health Sciences, Western University, London; and Evaluative Clinical Sciences (A.M.), Hurvitz Brain Sciences Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8764-6258
Cynthia J DanellsFrom the Rehabilitation Sciences Institute (R.A., J.U.), University of Toronto; Toronto Rehabilitation Institute-University Health Network (R.A., D.J., C.J.D., G.R., J.U., A.H.H., A.M.); Department of Physical Therapy (C.J.D., A.M.), University of Toronto; School of Physical Therapy (J.U.), Faculty of Health Sciences, Western University, London; and Evaluative Clinical Sciences (A.M.), Hurvitz Brain Sciences Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Gabriela RozanskiFrom the Rehabilitation Sciences Institute (R.A., J.U.), University of Toronto; Toronto Rehabilitation Institute-University Health Network (R.A., D.J., C.J.D., G.R., J.U., A.H.H., A.M.); Department of Physical Therapy (C.J.D., A.M.), University of Toronto; School of Physical Therapy (J.U.), Faculty of Health Sciences, Western University, London; and Evaluative Clinical Sciences (A.M.), Hurvitz Brain Sciences Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9538-2456
Janelle UngerFrom the Rehabilitation Sciences Institute (R.A., J.U.), University of Toronto; Toronto Rehabilitation Institute-University Health Network (R.A., D.J., C.J.D., G.R., J.U., A.H.H., A.M.); Department of Physical Therapy (C.J.D., A.M.), University of Toronto; School of Physical Therapy (J.U.), Faculty of Health Sciences, Western University, London; and Evaluative Clinical Sciences (A.M.), Hurvitz Brain Sciences Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Andrew H HuntleyFrom the Rehabilitation Sciences Institute (R.A., J.U.), University of Toronto; Toronto Rehabilitation Institute-University Health Network (R.A., D.J., C.J.D., G.R., J.U., A.H.H., A.M.); Department of Physical Therapy (C.J.D., A.M.), University of Toronto; School of Physical Therapy (J.U.), Faculty of Health Sciences, Western University, London; and Evaluative Clinical Sciences (A.M.), Hurvitz Brain Sciences Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9523-304X
Avril MansfieldFrom the Rehabilitation Sciences Institute (R.A., J.U.), University of Toronto; Toronto Rehabilitation Institute-University Health Network (R.A., D.J., C.J.D., G.R., J.U., A.H.H., A.M.); Department of Physical Therapy (C.J.D., A.M.), University of Toronto; School of Physical Therapy (J.U.), Faculty of Health Sciences, Western University, London; and Evaluative Clinical Sciences (A.M.), Hurvitz Brain Sciences Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada. avril.mansfield@uhn.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-0396-5815

Funding

CIHR MSH-141983
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the publication rate of motor-rehabilitation trials poststroke and the consistency between registry records and their corresponding main publications in trial design, primary objectives and outcomes, eligibility criteria, and sample size.

methodsWe searched 18 clinical trial registries to identify randomized controlled trials of motor-based stroke rehabilitation registered after July 2005 and completed before April 2017. Eligible trials included adults with stroke, with at least one outcome measure related to motor function. Information in the registry records was compared with that of their main publications, if any.

resultsThree hundred twenty-three trials met our eligibility criteria; we were unable to find a peer-reviewed publication reporting the main findings for 46% (150/323) of these. Of the 169 trials with peer-reviewed articles published in English, 141 (83%) were consistent with the registry record in trial design, 100 (59%) were consistent in primary objectives, 71 (42%) were consistent in primary outcomes, 28 (17%) were consistent in eligibility criteria, and 74 (44%) were consistent in sample size.

conclusionsApproximately half of motor-based stroke rehabilitation trials were not published, even more than 3 years after the end of the trial. When main publications were found, they substantially deviated from information in the registry record. These findings highlight the importance of trial registries for identifying unpublished stroke rehabilitation trials and of searching trial registries when conducting systematic reviews and meta-analysis to help ensure that reviews are unbiased.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicRegistriesStroke RehabilitationHumansMotor SkillsPhysical Functional PerformancePublishingStroke

Identifiers

PMID33568550
PMCPMC8055311

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.