ArticleNeurology international2025
Responsiveness and Minimal Important Change of the Mini- and Brief-Balance Evaluation Systems Tests in People with Incomplete Cervical Spinal Cord Injury: A Prospective Cohort Study.
Article in Neurology international, 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.
- Validation of the Czech adaptation of Mini-BESTest into clinical practice.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesResponsiveness and minimal important change (MIC) are key metrics that vary across conditions and should be determined for specific populations. However, these metrics have not yet been established for the Mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Mini-BESTest) and Brief-BESTest in people with subacute traumatic incomplete cervical spinal cord injury (iCSCI). In this study, we aimed to determine the responsiveness and MIC of the Mini-BESTest and Brief-BESTest in people with subacute iCSCI.
methodsThis study included people with iCSCI who could maintain the standing position for 30 s without assistance within 7 days of injury at the university hospital's advanced critical care center. Responsiveness was assessed by correlating Mini-BESTest and Brief-BESTest change scores with the Berg Balance Scale (BBS). MIC values were determined using the global rating of change scale as an anchor, employing receiver operating characteristic curve methods (MIC
resultsFifty people with iCSCI were included in the analysis. Changes in BBS scores were moderately positively correlated with changes in Mini-BESTest and Brief-BESTest scores. MIC
conclusionsMIC
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.