SynthesisBMC neurology2022
Suitability of accelerometry as an objective measure for upper extremity use in stroke patients.
Synthesis in BMC neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validity of FuncUseRatio for ecological monitoring of functional arm use after stroke: toward precision neurorehabilitation.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Relationships between arm and leg real-life activity and clinical assessments in individuals with disabling spasticity after stroke.Frontiers in stroke · 2026Article
- Upper Limb Capacity, Performance, and Leisure Participation in Children with Unilateral Cerebral Palsy.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Factors associated with upper extremity use after stroke: a scoping review of accelerometry studies.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Construct validity and responsiveness of clinical upper limb measures and sensor-based arm use within the first year after stroke: a longitudinal cohort study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Observational
- Exploring the Link Between Motor Functions and the Relative Use of the More Affected Arm in Adults with Cerebral Palsy.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effects of a Distributed Form of Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy for Clinical Application: The Keys Treatment Protocol.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Optimizing Epoch Length and Activity Count Threshold Parameters in Accelerometry: Enhancing Upper Extremity Use Quantification in Cerebral Palsy.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Concurrent validity of machine learning-classified functional upper extremity use from accelerometry in chronic stroke.Frontiers in physiology · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUpper limb (UL) paresis is one of the most common stroke consequences and significantly restricts patients in everyday life. Instruments objectively measuring direct arm use in stroke patients are lacking, but might be helpful to understand patients' impairment. Aiming to examine whether accelerometry is a suitable objective measure for everyday UL use in stroke patients, we conducted a systematic review on the association between accelerometer-derived measurements and clinical scales.
methodsArticles were systematically searched in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, PeDro and LIVIVO through December 12
resultsExcluding duplicates, the initial search yielded 477 records. In the 34 eligible studies accelerometers was used with a predominance of tri-axial accelerometery (n = 12) and only few with two-axial application (n = 4). Regarding measures to examine association to accelerometer data different clinical scales were applied depending on the setting, the degree of impairment and/or the status of stroke. Cut-off values to determine correlations varied largely; most significant correlations are reported for the MAL [Range 0.31- 0.84] and the ARAT [Range 0.15-0.79].
conclusionsAccelerometers can provide reliable data about daily arm use frequency but do not supply information about the movements´ quality and restrictions on everyday activities of stroke patients. Depending on the context, it is advisable to use both, accelerometry and other clinical measures. According to the literature there is currently no accelerometer device most suitable to measure UL activity. High correlations indicate that multi-dimensional accelerometers should be preferred.
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.