ArticleEuropean journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine2025
Psychometric validation of comprehensive coordination scale to assess the advanced coordination ability in people with stroke.
Article in European journal of physical and 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimThe aims of this study were to investigate the psychometric property of the Comprehensive Coordination Scale (CCS) in people with stroke.
designCross-sectional design.
settingUniversity based neurorehabilitation laboratory. POPULATION: Sixty-two people with stroke (33 men; mean ages=67.1±6.4 years; 8.8±4.9 years) and 31 healthy older adults (10 men, mean ages=65.9±4.2 years).
methodsCCS was conducted on the subjects, followed with ARAT, BBS, LOS, MoCA, and SF-12muscle strength test, Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Lower Extremity (FMA-LE) and Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), muscle strength, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Limit of Stability (LOS) test and 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF12).
resultsThere was a significant difference (P<0.001) of CCS score between people with stroke (mean difference=48.0±13.5) and healthy older adults (mean difference=62.9±12.1). CCS showed excellent test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)=0.953). The CCS-Total Score showed a significant positive correlation with the average muscle strength of affected side (dorsiflexors, plantarflexors, elbow flexor, and elbow extensor), FMA-UE score, FMA-LE Score, BBS Score, ARAT Score, and LOS (EE and ME) (r=0.387-0.857, P<0.007) in this study. The CCS-total score of 62.5 (sensitivity 83.9%; specificity of 83.9%; AUC=0.892, P<0.001) was shown to distinguish the walking performance between people with stroke and healthy older adults.
conclusionsThe CCS is a reliable, valid and objective assessment tool for evaluating the motor coordination in people with stroke. The CCS exhibited good diagnostic power for distinguishing the coordination ability of individuals with stroke from that of healthy older adults. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Therefore, the CCS is recommended for use in clinical settings to provide a detailed and comprehensive assessment of motor coordination impairment in 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.