Trial reportNeuroRehabilitation2023
Extrinsic feedback facilitates mental chronometry abilities in stroke patients.
Trial report in NeuroRehabilitation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Exploring the impact of aging on motor imagery abilities: a systematic review with meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMotor imagery (MI) can serve as a treatment for stroke rehabilitation. MI abilities can be assessed by testing mental chronometry (MC) as the degree of conformity between imagined and real performance of a task. A good MC performance is supposed to indicate good MI capacities.
objectiveTo explore if MC abilities can be modified by extrinsic feedback in stroke patients.
methods60 subacute stroke patients were randomized into three groups. MC was evaluated by executing a modified version of the Box and Block Test (BBT) mentally and in real before and after a training session. For Groups 1 and 2 the training consisted of repeated performance of the BBT in a mental and then a real version. The time needed to complete each task was measured. Only participants of Group 1 received feedback about how well mental and real performance matched. Group 3 executed the same number of BBTs but without MI.
resultsMC ability only improved in Group 1. The improvement lasted for at least 24 hours. In all groups, BBT real performance was improved post-training.
conclusionExternal feedback was able to enhance MC capability which might be an approach for improving MI abilities.
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.