ArticleFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2022
Effect of a tailored upper extremity strength training intervention combined with direct current stimulation in chronic stroke survivors: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02915185 (Combining Neurostimulation Technique With Tailored Interventions for the Affected Upper Extremity), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 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.
Combining Neurostimulation Technique With Tailored Interventions for the Affected Upper Extremity: Can it Promote Better Recovery in Stroke Survivors?
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Completion rate and safety of non-invasive brain stimulation for upper limb dysfunction after stroke: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Pooled it
- A feasibility study on the use of cranial nerve non-invasive neuromodulation to improve affected arm function in people in the chronic stage of a stroke.BMC neurology · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Comparative effects of resistance- and assistance-based robot training on brain activation and motor recovery in stroke patients.Frontiers in neurologyTrial
- Review
- Are Changes in Corticomotor Excitability Associated with Improved Arm Functional Performance Following a Tailored Strength Training Intervention in Chronic Stroke Survivors?Brain sciences · 2025Article
- LONG-TERM BENEFITS OF A TAILORED STRENGTH TRAINING INTERVENTION ON ARM FUNCTION IN CHRONIC STROKE SURVIVORS: A FOLLOW-UP STUDY.Journal of rehabilitation medicine. Clinical communications · 2025Article
- Chronic Functional Adaptations Induced by the Application of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined with Exercise Programs: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Strengthening exercises are recommended for managing persisting upper limb (UL) weakness following a stroke. Yet, strengthening exercises often lead to variable gains because of their generic nature. For this randomized controlled trial (RCT), we aimed to determine whether tailoring strengthening exercises using a biomarker of corticospinal integrity, as reflected in the amplitude of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), could optimize training effects in the affected UL. A secondary aim was to determine whether applying anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) could enhance exercise-induced training effects. For this multisite RCT, 90 adults at the chronic stage after stroke (>6 months) were recruited. Before training, participants underwent TMS to detect the presence of MEPs in the affected hand. The MEP amplitude was used to stratify participants into three training groups: (1) low-intensity, MEP <50 μV, (2) moderate-intensity, 50 μV < MEP < 120 μV, and (3) high-intensity, MEP>120 μV. Each group trained at a specific intensity based on the one-repetition maximum (1 RM): low-intensity, 35-50% 1RM; moderate-intensity, 50-65% 1RM; high-intensity, 70-85% 1RM. The strength training targeted the affected UL and was delivered 3X/week for four consecutive weeks. In each training group, participants were randomly assigned to receive either real or sham anodal tDCS (2 mA, 20 min) over the primary motor area of the affected hemisphere. Pre-/post-intervention, participants underwent a clinical evaluation of their UL to evaluate motor impairments (Fugl-Meyer Assessment), manual dexterity (Box and Blocks test) and grip strength. Post-intervention, all groups exhibited similar gains in terms of reduced impairments, improved dexterity, and grip strength, which was confirmed by multivariate and univariate analyses. However, no effect of interaction was found for tDCS or training group, indicating that tDCS had no significant impact on outcomes post-intervention. Collectively, these results indicate that adjusting training intensity based on the size of MEPs in the affected extremity provides a useful approach to optimize responses to strengthening exercises in chronic stroke survivors. Also, the lack of add-on effects of tDCS applied to the lesioned hemisphere on exercise-induced improvements in the affected UL raises questions about the relevance of combining such interventions in stroke. Clinical trial registry number: NCT02915185. https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02915185.
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.