ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
A Comparative Analysis of Functional Status and Mobility in Stroke Patients with and without Aphasia.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Association between Marital/Partner Status and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Stroke Patients: A Systematic Review.Cerebrovascular diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Sleep mediates the association between stroke and all cause mortality in the NHANES cohort.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the functional outcome and mobility of patients after stroke depending on their cognitive state.Scientific reports · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
All researchers agree that aphasia is a serious consequence of a stroke, but they also report contradictory data regarding the functional outcome. The aim of this study was, therefore, to assess the functional outcomes of stroke patients with and without aphasia, who were undertaking a regular rehabilitation programme. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study group consisted of 116 post-stroke patients, including 54 patients without aphasia (G1) and 62 patients with aphasia (G2). The following tests were used before (T1) and after (T2) rehabilitation measurement points: Barthel Index (BI), Sitting Assessment Scale (SAS), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Trunk Control Test (TCT), Test Up & Go (TUG) and the Timed Walk Test (TWT).
resultsThe group of post-stroke patients with aphasia had a significantly longer time since a stroke on admission, a significantly longer length of stay in the ward and significantly worse SAS and TCT scores at T2, compared to patients without aphasia. Both groups achieved significant improvement in all studied parameters (SAS, TCT, BI, BBS, TUG and TWT). Aphasia was a predictor of functional status in the stroke patients group, but only at the time of admission to the ward.
conclusionsPatients with and without aphasia have an equal likelihood of improving their functional status and returning to independence. Aphasia should not be an absolute factor that excludes stroke patients from research studies on their functional status.
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.