Comment on Anwer et al. Rehabilitation of Upper Limb Motor Impairment in Stroke: A Narrative Review on the Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Economic Statistics of Stroke and State of the Art Therapies.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Exploring high-density corticomuscular networks after stroke to enable a hybrid Brain-Computer Interface for hand motor rehabilitation.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023
   Article
2. Reply to Morone, G.; Giansanti, D. Comment on "Anwer et al. Rehabilitation of Upper Limb Motor Impairment in Stroke: A Narrative Review on the Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Economic Statistics of Stroke and State of the Art Therapies.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
   Article
3. Virtual reality after stroke: Identifying important characteristics when designing experiences to improve engagement in upper limb rehabilitation.Digital health
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract