ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2024
Validity of an android device for assessing mobility in people with chronic stroke and hemiparesis: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Smartphone Platform for Remote Motor Fitness Assessment and AI-Generated Personalized Exercise Programs for Older Adults: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- The Relation Between Hemiparetic Gait Patterns and Walking Function After Stroke, as Measured with Wearable Sensors.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2025Observational
- Quantitative Evaluation of Postural SmartVest's Multisensory Feedback for Affordable Smartphone-Based Post-Stroke Motor Rehabilitation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Wearable Smartphone-Based Multisensory Feedback System for Torso Posture Correction: Iterative Design and Within-Subjects Study.JMIR aging · 2025Article
- Core muscle rehabilitation during early mobilization after stroke: a narrative review and clinical framework.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIncorporating instrument measurements into clinical assessments can improve the accuracy of results when assessing mobility related to activities of daily living. This can assist clinicians in making evidence-based decisions. In this context, kinematic measures are considered essential for the assessment of sensorimotor recovery after stroke. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of using an Android device to evaluate kinematic data during the performance of a standardized mobility test in people with chronic stroke and hemiparesis.
methodsThis is a cross-sectional study including 36 individuals with chronic stroke and hemiparesis and 33 age-matched healthy subjects. A simple smartphone attached to the lumbar spine with an elastic band was used to measure participants' kinematics during a standardized mobility test by using the inertial sensor embedded in it. This test includes postural control, walking, turning and sitting down, and standing up. Differences between stroke and non-stroke participants in the kinematic parameters obtained after data sensor processing were studied, as well as in the total execution and reaction times. Also, the relationship between the kinematic parameters and the community ambulation ability, degree of disability and functional mobility of individuals with stroke was studied.
resultsCompared to controls, participants with chronic stroke showed a larger medial-lateral displacement (p = 0.022) in bipedal stance, a higher medial-lateral range (p < 0.001) and a lower cranio-caudal range (p = 0.024) when walking, and lower turn-to-sit power (p = 0.001), turn-to-sit jerk (p = 0.026) and sit-to-stand jerk (p = 0.001) when assessing turn-to-sit-to-stand. Medial-lateral range and total execution time significantly correlated with all the clinical tests (p < 0.005), and resulted significantly different between independent and limited community ambulation patients (p = 0.042 and p = 0.006, respectively) as well as stroke participants with significant disability or slight/moderate disability (p = 0.024 and p = 0.041, respectively).
conclusionThis study reports a valid, single, quick and easy-to-use test for assessing kinematic parameters in chronic stroke survivors by using a standardized mobility test with a smartphone. This measurement could provide valid clinical information on reaction time and kinematic parameters of postural control and gait, which can help in planning better intervention approaches.
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.