ArticleFrontiers in neurology2022
Assessing bilateral ankle proprioceptive acuity in stroke survivors: An exploratory study.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Targeted ankle proprioceptive training improves balance, gait, and functional mobility in chronic stroke survivors: a multicenter randomized controlled trial with longitudinal follow-up.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Trial
- Novel Clinical Assessment of Visual, Vestibular, Somatosensory, and Autonomic Function: Establishing Test Re-Test Reliability in a Healthy Population.Perceptual and motor skills · 2026Article
- Contemporary Review: Proprioception in Ankle Stability.Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2025Review
- Proprioception After Unilateral Stroke: Changes in the Affected and Unaffected Lower Limbs Over Time.Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy · 2025Article
- Ankle joint position sense acuity differences among stroke survivors at three walking ability levels: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in neurology · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bilateral proprioception deficits were reported in stroke survivors. However, whether bilateral proprioception deficits exist in the ankle joint after stroke was unclear. Ankle proprioception is a significant predictor of balance dysfunction after stroke, and previous studies to date are lacking appropriate evaluation methods. Objectives: We want to determine whether the active movement extent discrimination apparatus (AMEDA) is a reliable tool for assessing ankle proprioceptive acuity in stroke survivors and the presence of deficits in ankle proprioception on the affected and unaffected sides in patients after stroke. Methods: Bilateral ankle proprioception was assessed in 20 stroke patients and 20 age-matched healthy controls using AMEDA. Test-retest reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The ICC in the affected and unaffected sides was 0.713 and 0.74, respectively. Analysis of variance revealed significant deficits in ankle proprioception in subacute stroke survivors vs. healthy controls (F = 2.719, Conclusions: Stroke survivors had bilateral deficits in ankle proprioceptive acuity during active movements compared with age-matched healthy controls, underscoring the need to evaluate these deficits on both sides of the body and develop effective sensorimotor rehabilitation methods for this patient population. The AMEDA can reliably determine bilateral ankle proprioceptive acuity in stroke survivors.
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.