ArticleArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2023
Remote Delivery of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment for the Upper Extremity: A Pilot Study to Assess Feasibility, Reliability, and Validity.
Article in Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation, 2023. 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.
- Current Status of Barriers to mHealth Access Among Patients With Stroke and Steps Toward the Digital Health Era: Systematic Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2024Pooled it
- Reliability of the Italian Version of the Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity Scale Administered Remotely.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Impact of Parakinesia brachialis oscitans on limb functional recovery after stroke: a cohort study.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
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
Objective: To develop a remote protocol for the upper extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment (reFMA) and assess the reliability and validity with in-person delivery. Design: Feasibility testing. Setting: Remote/virtual and in-person in participants' homes. Participants: Three triads of therapists, stroke survivors, and carepartners (N=9) participated in Phases 1 and 2. Twelve different stroke survivors participated in Phase 3. Intervention: The FMA was administered and received remotely using the instructional protocol (Phases 1 and 2). Pilot testing with the delivery of the reFMA remotely and the FMA in-person occurred in Phase 3. Main Outcome Measures: Feedback for refinement and feasibility of obtaining the reFMA (including the System Usability Scale) and the FMA scores remotely and in-person to assess reliability and validity of the reFMA. Results: The reFMA was refined to incorporate feedback and suggestions from users. Interrater reliability between 2 therapists evaluating the FMA remotely was found to be poor with little agreement. For criterion validity, only 1 out of 12 (8.3%) total scores were in agreement between the in-person and remote assessments. Conclusion: Reliable and valid remote administration of the FMA is an important aspect of telerehabilitation for the upper extremity after stroke, but further research is needed to address current protocol limitations. This study provides preliminary support for the need for alternative strategies to improve appropriate implementation of the FMA remotely. Possible explanations for the poor reliability are explored and suggestions for improvement of the remote delivery of the FMA are provided.
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.