ArticlePeerJ2025
Comparing the Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke and Berg Balance Scale for predicting community walking ability at discharge in subacute stroke: a prospective cohort study.
Article in PeerJ, 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.
- Effect of robot-assisted gait training combined with electroacupuncture on lower limb motor function and brain network characteristics in stroke: an EEG study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Balance assessment is crucial for predicting community ambulation outcomes in subacute stroke patients undergoing rehabilitation. This study aims to compare the accuracy of the Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients (PASS) and the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) in predicting community walking ability at discharge from rehabilitation. Methods: This prospective cohort study included 47 stroke patients admitted to a 4-week inpatient rehabilitation program. Patients were assessed with PASS and BBS at admission. Discharge assessments included the Functional Ambulation Categories and 6-Min Walk Distance tests. Statistical analysis involved calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and cut-off scores. Results: PASS and BBS demonstrated excellent predictive accuracy, with AUC values of 0.955 (95% CI [0.850-0.994]) for PASS and 0.991 (95% CI [0.906-1.000]) for BBS. Cut-off scores were >28 for PASS and >46 for BBS. Sensitivity was high for both (94.44%, 95% CI [72.7-99.9]), while BBS had superior specificity (96.43%, 95% CI [81.7-99.9]) compared to PASS (85.71%, 95% CI [67.3-96.0]). BBS also had a higher positive likelihood ratio (26.44 Conclusions: PASS and BBS assessed at admission are highly accurate tools for predicting community ambulation at discharge in subacute stroke patients, with BBS demonstrating a slight advantage, particularly in its positive predictive value. These findings support the use of both scales to guide rehabilitative clinical decision-making.
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.