ArticleFrontiers in neurology2022
Evaluating the validity of a functional electrical stimulation clinical decision making tool: A qualitative 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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- VisR Ultrasound for Monitoring Muscle Fatigue with FES-Induced and Volitional Isometric Contraction of the Rectus Femoris in Participants with Uninjured and Injured Spinal Cords.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- An Intuitive, Bidirectional, and Adaptive Functional Electrical Stimulation System for Hand Rehabilitation.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2026Article
- Reinforcement Learning Agent Trained as FES Controller in Modified Xia-Law Simulation Robustly Controls Grip Force.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 2025Article
- Implementing functional electrical stimulation clinical practice guidelines to support mobility: A stakeholder consultation.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Following central nervous system damage, the recovery of motor function is a priority. For some neurological populations, functional electrical stimulation (FES) is recommended in best practice guidelines for neurorehabilitation. However, limited resources exist to guide FES application, despite clinicians reporting that a lack of FES knowledge prevents use in clinical practice. The FES Clinical Decision Making Tool was developed to assist clinicians with FES application and translation into clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the content validity of the Tool from the perspectives of Canadian physical and occupational therapists using FES in neurorehabilitation. Methods: Thirteen participants (twelve women, one man), aged 40.5 ± 10.3 years, participated in individual semi-structured interviews to explore their clinical decision making experiences when applying FES and to evaluate the content validity (i.e., appropriateness, comprehensibility, and comprehensiveness) of the Tool. Interviews were analyzed using a qualitative conventional content analysis following the DEPICT model. Results: Three themes were identified. 1) Clinician context influences FES usage. Participants' experiences with FES use varied and application was influenced by treatment goals. 2) Parameter selection in clinical practice. Participants identified decision-making strategies and the challenges of parameter selection. 3) With modifications, the Tool is a valid resource to inform FES applications. Participants discussed its strengths, limitations, and suggested changes. While the Tool is useful, a more extensive resource (e.g., appendix) for the Tool is warranted. Discussion: A revised Tool was created to improve its comprehensiveness and comprehensibility. Thus, the Tool is a valid resource for applying FES in neurorehabilitation.
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.