ArticleFrontiers in neurology2023
Stratified predictions of upper limb motor outcomes after stroke.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Closed-loop brain-computer interfaces for post-stroke sensorimotor loop restoration.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Frontoparietal Structural Network Disconnections Correlate With Outcome After a Severe Stroke.Human brain mapping · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Longitudinal observations of upper limb motor recovery after stroke have suggested that certain subgroups may exhibit distinct recovery patterns. Here we sought to examine whether the predictive ability for post-stroke upper limb motor outcomes could be enhanced by applying conventional stratification strategies. Method: For 60 individuals who suffered the first stroke, upper limb motor impairment was assessed with the upper extremity Fugl-Meyer assessment (UE-FMA) at 2 weeks as a baseline and then 3 months post-stroke. Brain structural damage at baseline was assessed by MRI data-derived markers ranging from traditional lesion size to the lesion load and to the disconnectome. Linear regression models for predicting upper limb motor outcomes (UE-FMA score at 3 months post-stroke) based on baseline upper limb motor impairment (UE-FMA score at 2 weeks post-stroke), brain structural damage, and their combinations were generated, and those with the best predictive performance were determined for individual subgroups stratified according to initial impairment (severe and non-severe), lesion location (cortical and non-cortical), and neurophysiological status (motor evoked potential-positive and motor evoked potential-negative). Results: The best predictions were made by baseline upper limb motor impairment alone for subgroups with less functional impairment (non-severe) or less structural involvement (non-cortical), but by the combination of baseline upper limb motor impairment and brain structural damage for the other subgroups. The predictive models tailored for subgroups determined according to initial impairment and neurophysiological status yielded a smaller overall error than that for the whole group in upper limb motor outcome predictions. Discussion: The predictive ability for upper limb motor outcomes could be enhanced beyond the one-size-fits-all model for all individuals with stroke by applying specific stratification strategies, with stratification according to initial impairment being the most promising. We expect that predictive models tailored for individual subgroups could lead closer to the personalized prognosis of upper limb motor outcomes after stroke.
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.