ReviewBrazilian journal of physical therapy
"Go neurological physical therapy research, go"! Volume and methodological quality of neurological physical therapy: A 63-year PEDro database analyses.
Review in Brazilian journal of physical therapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTwo decades ago, more than 200 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of neurological physical therapy interventions in adults and pediatric populations were identified from 1958 to 2000, with half rated moderate to high quality on the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. Does the current panorama remain the same?
objectiveTo investigate the changes in volume and quality of RCT of neurological physical therapy in adults and paediatrics indexed in the PEDro database between 1958 to 2021. In addition, to investigate if there is a relationship between journal impact factor and methodological quality.
methodsAll RCTs of neurological physical therapy in adults and pediatrics indexed in PEDro between 1958-2021 were included. Descriptive statistics described trial volume, quality, and trends over the years. Spearman's rho correlation test assessed the association between methodological quality and journal ranking (Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and Journal Citation Indication (JCI)).
resultsA total of 6291 RCTs of neurological physical therapy in adults and pediatrics were indexed in PEDro between 1958-2021, with a mean PEDro scale score of 5.3/10 (SD 1.6). The quality of RCTs improved over time, with a mean score of 5.7/10 (SD 1.4) for RCTs published between 2018-2021, compared to 1/10 between 1962-1965. A weak and significant relationship was found between methodological quality and JIF (r=0.153; p<0.001) and JCI (r=0.146; p<0.001).
conclusionThere is a large and growing volume of RCTs on neurological physical therapy in adults and pediatrics indexed in PEDro, with increasing quality over time, though still moderate. Journal ranking should not be used for selecting high quality RCTs.
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.