SynthesisClinical rehabilitation2024
Remotely Assessing Motor Function and Activity of the Upper Extremity After Stroke: A Systematic Review of Validity and Clinical Utility of Tele-Assessments.
Synthesis in Clinical rehabilitation, 2024. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this systematic review is to identify currently available tele-assessments for motor impairments of the upper extremity in adults after a stroke and to assess their psychometric properties and clinical utility. DATA SOURCES: We searched for studies describing the psychometric properties of tele-assessments for the motor function of the upper extremity. A systematic search was conducted in the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Medline via OVID, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science and Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore from inception until 30 April 2024. REVIEW
methodsThe quality assessment for the included studies and the rating of the psychometric properties were performed using the COSMIN Risk of Bias Checklist for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures.
resultsA total of 12 studies (N = 3912) describing 11 tele-assessments met the predefined inclusion criteria. The included assessments were heterogeneous in terms of quality and psychometric properties and risk of bias. None of the tele-assessments currently meets the criteria of clinical utility to be recommended for clinical practice without restriction.
conclusionThe quality and clinical utility of tele-assessments varied widely, suggesting a cautious consideration for immediate clinical practice application. There is potential for tele-assessments in clinical practice, but the clinical benefits need to be improved by simplifying the complexity of tele-assessments. REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022335035.
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.