ArticleJournal of rehabilitation medicine2025
A cup half full: exploring the kinematic consequences of variations in the drinking task protocol.
Article 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveKinematic assessment of the drinking task offers objective metrics of upper limb recovery following neurological injury. The rehabilitation research community's increased interest has led to consensus standardization efforts. These efforts inherently depend on fidelity of the activity protocol underlying drinking task kinematics. This study's objective is to investigate whether differences in the drinking task protocol, as observed in prior literature, impact common kinematic metrics.
designIncomplete block design with repeated-measures. SUBJECTS/PATIENTS: Six neurotypical participants.
methodsSeating position, cup start position, and target definition for cup return were varied. Mixed effects linear models analysed the impact of protocol variants on validated kinematic metrics used in stroke rehabilitation research.
resultsAll considered factors have a significant impact on at least 1 kinematic metric. Seating position impacts movement time (p = 0.035) and trunk displacement (p = 0.017), cup starting position impacts trunk displacement (p = 0.001), and target definition impacts movement time (p = 0.036). Of note, none of the factors significantly altered the number of movement units.
conclusionFurther refinement and adherence to a standardized protocol for the drinking task activity may reduce between-study effects and promote the successful uptake of upper limb kinematic assessment in the rehabilitation research community.
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.