ArticleJournal of rehabilitation medicine2022
Reliability and Validity of a New Diagnostic Device for Quantifying Hemiparetic Arm Impairments: An Exploratory Study.
Article in Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- System identification: a feasible, reliable and valid way to quantify upper limb motor impairments.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess test-retest reliability and validity of a new diagnostic device, the Shoulder Elbow Perturbator, to quantify muscle weakness, abnormal synergy, (muscle activity-related) spasticity, and changes in viscoelastic joint properties of the elbow. SUBJECTS: Stroke patients, adults with cerebral palsy and healthy controls.
methodsTest-retest reliability was evaluated using intra-class correlations (ICC) and assessment of measurement error. The device's validity was evaluated by demonstrating differences between patients and healthy controls, and correlations of spasticity and abnormal synergy outcomes using the clinical Modified Tardieu Scale, the Fugl-Meyer Assessment, and the Test of Arm Selective Control.
resultsReliability was excellent, with an ICC > 0.75 for synergy and ICCs > 0.90 for all other impairments, with relatively small measurement errors. Validity was confirmed by group differences between patients and healthy controls for muscle weakness, spasticity, and viscoelastic joint properties, but not for abnormal synergy. Correlation analysis with clinical scales confirmed validity for spasticity, while, for synergy, correlations were found in the patients with stroke, but not those with cerebral palsy.
conclusionThis new diagnostic device is a reliable and valid instrument to assess multiple upper limb impairments in patients with neurological conditions, supporting its use in clinical practice. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.
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.