SynthesisEuropean journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine2025
Assessment of ambulation functions through kinematic analysis in individuals with stroke: a systematic review.
Synthesis in European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Kinematic Biomarkers of Limb Shortening and Compensations in Hemiparetic Gait: A Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- Deep Learning-Based Automated Clinical Gait Assessment From Kinematic Data in People With Stroke: Development and Validation Study.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2026Article
- Reproducible candidate kinematic-electromyographic waveform markers of post-stroke gait from public multimodal waveform exports.Frontiers in medical technology · 2026Article
- Interpretable side-aware kinematic-sEMG gait-state representations relevant to adaptive neurorobotic assistance after stroke: a public-dataset study.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2026Article
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
introductionAlthough kinematic assessments for stroke-induced lower limb impairments offer a promising alternative to conventional scale evaluations, interpreting high-dimensional kinematic data remains challenging due to numerous metrics reported in past studies. This study aimed to provide an exhaustive overview of existing studies using kinematics data to assess the gait impairments in individuals with stroke, along with examining their clinimetric properties for future clinical applications. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic search was conducted across PubMed (08/2024), Scopus (08/2024), Web of Science (08/2024), CINAHL (08/2024), EMBASE (08/2024), and IEEE (08/2024). We included articles that recruited individuals over 18 years old with stroke and utilized motion capture technologies to evaluate lower limb kinematics. Similar metrics were consolidated in the analysis, and the COSMIN Risk of Bias Checklist was used to evaluate the methodological quality of studies investigating the clinimetric properties of kinematic metrics. Convergent validity of metrics was evaluated by examining their association with the Fugl-Meyer scale of lower limbs and walking speed. Moreover, the GRADE approach was used to rate the quality of evidence. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 383 studies were classified into 10 categories. Seven studies on metric reliability were rated high for methodological quality. Metrics with satisfactory reliability included spatiotemporal, spatial metrics, and a data-driven score. Six studies with high methodological quality assessed convergent validity. The dynamic gait index, angular component of the coefficient of correspondence (ACC), change in cadence, stride length, and hip range of motion showed satisfactory validity. Among the 13 studies, 12 studies were rated as moderate quality of evidence using the GRADE approach.
conclusionsThere are significant variations in measurements across studies, and high-quality studies evaluating clinimetric properties are scarce. For a more standardized evidence-based approach to kinematic lower limb assessment, further high-quality research validating these assessments' clinimetric properties is essential.
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.