ArticleJournal of physical therapy science2023
Validity of functional assessment for control of trunk in patients with subacute stroke: a multicenter, cross-sectional study.
Article in Journal of physical therapy science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictive Sub-items and Cutoff Scores of the Functional Assessment for Control of Trunk (FACT) for Gait Independence in Patients with Acute Stroke.Physical therapy research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
[Purpose] The purpose of this study was to clarify the criterion validity, construct validity, and feasibility of the Functional Assessment for Control of Trunk (FACT). [Participants and Methods] This study was a multicenter, cross-sectional study of patients with subacute stroke at three Japanese rehabilitation hospitals. To clarify feasibility, we examined the differences in the measurement time between FACT and the Trunk Impairment Scale (TIS). For the criterion validity of FACT, correlations between FACT, TIS, and the trunk items of the Stroke Impairment Assessment Set (SIAS) were examined using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. For the construct validity of FACT, we examined the correlations with the other assessments. [Results] Seventy-three patients participated in this study. The measurement time was significantly shorter for FACT (212.6 ± 79.2 s) than TIS (372.4 ± 199.6 s). For criterion validity, FACT correlated significantly with TIS (r=0.896) and two SIAS trunk items (r=0.453, 0.594). For construct validity, significant correlations were found for FACT and other tests (r=0.249-0.797). Areas under the curve for FACT and TIS were 0.809 and 0.812, respectively, and the cutoff values for walking independence were 9 and 13 points, respectively. [Conclusion] For inpatients with stroke, FACT offered feasibility, criterion validity, and construct validity.
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.