ArticleNeurorehabilitation and neural repair2025
Beyond Arm Capacity in Chronic Stroke: Evaluating Paretic Arm Non-Use Through Arm Efficiency-A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Neurorehabilitation and neural repair, 2025. 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.
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundAfter a stroke, the use of the paretic arm is determined by its capacity (what it can or cannot do). When both arms have capacity to perform a task, the choice of which arm to use must be based on another criterion, probably by comparing the efficiency of each arm. Two numerical models account for this: the capacity model (the paretic arm is chosen in preference) and the efficiency model (the most efficient arm is chosen).ObjectiveTo numerically determine whether capacity or efficiency best predict the use of the paretic arm in activities of daily living.MethodsWe performed numerical simulations to predict paretic arm use with either the capacity model or the efficiency model. We used the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) to compare the adequacy of the 2 models in predicting clinical and accelerometric data collected from 30 patients with chronic stroke.ResultsThe efficiency model predicted arm use in activities of daily living better than the capacity model (BIC = -66.95 vs -5.89; root mean square error = 0.26 vs 0.72).ConclusionsThe study highlights the importance of considering efficiency when assessing paretic arm non-use. Assessing individuals' arm efficiency should help personalize rehabilitation strategies 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.