Trial reportSao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina2025
Effects of unsupervised walking on walk performance and functional mobility in individuals with chronic stroke: a blind randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Recent research on rehabilitation interventions for post-stroke gait and balance in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2026Article
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
backgroundWhat are the effects of walking training on the ground in an unsupervised manner and with different weekly durations after chronic stroke?
objectiveTo compare the effects of unsupervised walking for 150 and 300 minutes per week on walking performance, speed, and functional mobility in individuals with chronic stroke. DESIGN AND
settingRandomized clinical trial was conducted at Rede Sarah Rehabilitation Hospital (São Luís, Brazil).
methodsIndividuals included (n = 40) were assessed using the 6-minute walk test (6MWT), functional mobility using the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, and the Five Times Sit to Stand Test (FTSST). They were assigned to the two experimental groups and instructed to walk 150 (G150) or 300 minutes per week (G300) and to perform unsupervised gait training for the next eight weeks.
resultsNo significant differences were observed between the group factors and no significant interaction was found for the group × time interaction, indicating that G150 and G300 changed similarly. The comfortable walking speed increased for both G150 and G300, resulting in a large effect size. Performance on the TUG and 6MWT also improved, but the effect size was small. For maximum walking speed, despite the improvement in performance in G150 and the G300, effect size was medium for both groups. The same was true for the FTSST.
conclusionUnsupervised walking was effective in improving gait performance and functional mobility in individuals with chronic stroke regardless of the recommended weekly duration (150 or 300 minutes). CLINICAL
trial registrationRBR-5g4g9bq (https://ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-5g4g9bq).
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.