SynthesisJournal of rehabilitation medicine2023
Essential training variables of arm-hand training in people with cervical spinal cord injury: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exercise training promotes nerve cell repair and regeneration after spinal cord injury.Neural regeneration research · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Effectiveness of Robot-Assisted Versus Conventional Occupational Therapy on Changes in Upper Extremity Function After Cervical Spinal Cord Injury (Armeo X-over Trial): Study Protocol of a Randomised Crossover Trial.Methods and protocols · 2026Article
- Observational
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo identify and evaluate 3 training variables of motor training programmes involving people with a cervical spinal cord injury: i.e. motor training strategies, therapy dosage, and persons' motivation for arm-hand functioning in subacute and chronic phases.
methodsPubMed, Cochrane, CINAHL, EMBASE, and DARE databases were searched for active arm-hand motor training programmes. Two independent reviewers assessed methodological quality. Pre-post effect sizes were calculated using Hedge's g, and mean effect sizes were calculated to compare outcomes on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health levels of function and activity.
resultsTwelve training programmes integrated mainly skill training alone or combined with strength and/or endurance training. Task-oriented training components included: multiple movement planes, functional movements, clear functional goals, and bimanual practice. Training duration of 8 weeks was common. Quantitative analyses of 8 training programmes showed an overall small effect (0.34) on function level and an overall moderate effect (0.55) on activity level. In depth-analysis of activity level showed moderate effects of skill training only (0.55) or combined with strength and endurance training (0.53). Moderate effects (0.53-0.60) were found for integrating functional movements, clear functional goals, real-life object manipulation, multiple movement planes, total skill practice, context-specific environment, exercise variety, and bimanual practice. Training of minimum 8 weeks showed a moderate effect (0.60-0.69).
conclusionBased on limited studies, arm-hand functioning aiming to improve activity level can be improved using skill training with at least 8 task-oriented training components, additional strength and endurance training, with a minimum training duration of 8 weeks.
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.