ArticleArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2025
Reliability of the Five Step Assessment and Its Coefficients of Impairment in Spastic Paresis.
Article in Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To determine the intrarater and interrater reliability of the Five Step Assessment (FSA) and its derived coefficients of impairment in chronic spastic paresis. Design: Prospective observational study. Setting: Study of outpatients followed in a rehabilitation department. Participants: In this single-center prospective study, participants (n=18) with chronic hemiparesis (>1y since injury) were evaluated by 4 raters (3 medical doctors, 1 physiotherapist; experience in hemiparesis, 14±9y). Interventions: All raters estimated muscle shortening, spasticity, weakness, and fatigability against the resistance of 8 key antagonists in adults twice, one week apart. Main Outcome Measures: FSA involves measuring 4 angles: angle of arrest at slow speed of stretch (X Results: Among 18 participants (four women), intrarater reliability was good to excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient >0.75) for all parameters in all muscles. Interrater reliability was good to excellent for all muscles and parameters except for spasticity grade Y and coefficient of fatigability (moderate). Conclusions: The 5 parameters and 4 coefficients of impairment of the FSA have moderate-to-excellent intrarater and interrater reliability in chronic spastic paresis.
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.