SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2025
Psychometric properties of technology-assisted matching paradigms in post-stroke upper limb proprioceptive assessment: a scoping review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Proprioceptive impairments affect 34-64% of post-stroke patients, impacting motor recovery and daily activities. Technology-assisted matching paradigms offer precise, quantitative assessment of upper limb proprioception, but their psychometric properties require evaluation. Methods: The search was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and MEDLINE to identify studies on technology-assisted matching paradigms for assessing upper limb proprioception in post-stroke patients. Studies were selected based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and relevant data were extracted. Results: A total of 13 articles were included. Upper limb robots for active mirror-matching tasks were the most used technology among our included studies (9 out of 13 studies). Seven studies showed a moderate level of concurrent validity, and four studies showed a moderate level of convergent validity. Seven studies compared stroke patients to healthy individuals, with most showing good responsiveness. Five studies revealed moderate to high test-retest and inter-rater reliability. Conclusion: Technology-assisted matching paradigms demonstrate moderate validity and moderate to high reliability when applied in clinical settings for assessing upper limb proprioception in post-stroke patients.
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.