ArticleBMJ open2022
eHealth tools to assess neurological function: a systematic review protocol for a mapping exercise.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- eHealth tools to assess the neurological function for research, in absence of the neurologist: a systematic review, part II (hardware).Journal of neurology · 2025Pooled it
- eHealth tools to assess the neurological function for research, in absence of the neurologist - a systematic review, part I (software).Journal of neurology · 2024Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPopulation-based epidemiological studies investigating risk/protective factors are outlining prevention strategies for neurological conditions that often do not have effective treatment. However, ascertaining neurological outcomes can be a time consuming and expensive process, often requiring specialised personnel and/or equipment. Thus, collecting neurological data on a large scale has been an ongoing challenge for clinicians and researchers alike. The development of new technology and the emergence of several opportunities to adapt it to the health research and practice (eHealth) can be a promising solution to this problem. Several neurological eHealth tools have been developed, with many others being currently planned. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We propose a systematic review mapping the available eHealth tools for assessing the different aspects of neurological function. The search aims at identifying studies published in peer-reviewed journals, which focused on the development or implementation of eHealth for assessing neurological signs or symptoms. Four engine databases are being considered (PubMed, EBSCOhost, Web of Science and Scopus), and data extraction will follow a process aimed at classifying them by their characteristics and purposes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This mapping exercise will be made available to researchers in order to aid them in successfully ascertaining neurological outcomes in large population-based epidemiological studies. Given the nature of this study, no ethical clearance was needed to conduct the review.
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.