Observational studyJournal of rehabilitation medicine2025
Are the 6-minute walk test and the 2-minute walk test equivalent in acute and subacute stroke survivors in Belgium and Vietnam: a multicultural study.
Observational study in Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo test the equivalence of the 6-minute walk test and the 2-minute walk test in stroke survivors in a multicultural setting, focusing on reliability, performance, and associations with clinical and anthropometric factors.
designCross-sectional observational study. SUBJECTS/PATIENTS: 238 participants (119 stroke survivors and 119 healthy individuals matched for age and sex).
methodsParticipants were assessed using the 6-minute walk test and the 2-minute walk test in Belgium and Vietnam. Stroke survivors were assessed in the acute and subacute phases (17 days post-stroke) and reassessed after 1-3 days.
resultsThe 6-minute walk test and the 2-minute walk test showed high test-retest reliability (ICC > 0.96). The difference between the two tests was not significant in terms of walking distance reduction in stroke survivors relative to healthy participants (1.4%), not clinically meaningful for walking speed (0.026 m/s), and not significant in chronotropic response (1.6 bpm). The correlation between the 2 tests in stroke survivors was high (r = 0.93) and walking distance was moderately related to height, weight, and phase, and type of stroke (p < 0.05).
conclusionThe 6-minute walk test and the 2-minute walk test exhibited similar results in measuring the impact of stroke on walking performance. The similarity between Belgium and Vietnam further supports the clinical equivalence of both tests among acute and subacute stroke survivors.
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.