Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34179749›Full record

ArticleArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2021

Study Paradigms and Principles Investigated in Motor Learning Research After Stroke: A Scoping Review.

Sarah Gregor, Tyler M Saumur, Lucas D Crosby, Jessica Powers, Kara K Patterson

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

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

  1. Action observation for upper limb rehabilitation after stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Is hypnotic assessment relevant to neurology?Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2022
    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

5 authors.

Sarah GregorKITE, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario.
Tyler M SaumurKITE, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario.
Lucas D CrosbyKITE, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario.
Jessica PowersKITE, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario.
Kara K PattersonKITE, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo (1) characterize study paradigms used to investigate motor learning (ML) poststroke and (2) summarize the effects of different ML principles in promoting skill acquisition and retention. Our secondary objective is to evaluate the clinical utility of ML principles on stroke rehabilitation. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Excerpta Medica Database, Allied and Complementary Medicine, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception on October 24, 2018 and repeated on June 23, 2020. Scopus was searched on January 24, 2019 and July 22, 2020 to identify additional studies. STUDY SELECTION: Our search included keywords and concepts to represent stroke and "motor learning. An iterative process was used to generate study selection criteria. Three authors independently completed title, abstract, and full-text screening. DATA EXTRACTION: Three reviewers independently completed data extraction. DATA SYNTHESIS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension guidelines for scoping reviews were used to guide our synthesis. Thirty-nine studies were included. Study designs were heterogeneous, including variability in tasks practiced, acquisition parameters, and retention intervals. ML principles investigated included practice complexity, feedback, motor imagery, mental practice, action observation, implicit and explicit information, aerobic exercise, and neurostimulation. An additional 2 patient-related factors that influence ML were included: stroke characteristics and sleep. Practice complexity, feedback, and mental practice/action observation most consistently promoted ML, while provision of explicit information and more severe strokes were detrimental to ML. Other factors (ie, sleep, practice structure, aerobic exercise, neurostimulation) had a less clear influence on learning.

conclusionsImproved consistency of reporting in ML studies is needed to improve study comparability and facilitate meta-analyses to better understand the influence of ML principles on learning poststroke. Knowledge of ML principles and patient-related factors that influence ML, with clinical judgment can guide neurologic rehabilitation delivery to improve patient motor outcomes.

Indexed as

Neurologic rehabilitationRehabilitationStroke

Identifiers

PMID34179749
PMCPMC8211998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.