ArticleRestorative neurology and neuroscience2026
Are Kinematic Assessments from a Planar Reaching Task Better Than Standardized Clinical Assessments at Predicting Functional Independence in Chronic Stroke Survivors?
Article in Restorative neurology and neuroscience, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Kinematic assessments provide a quantitative evaluation of movement outcomes in chronic stroke survivors. However, it is unclear whether these assessments provide an added benefit to standardized clinical assessments when evaluating functional independence. We hypothesized that kinematic assessments of ipsilesional arm motor and cognitive performance would be better at predicting functional independence compared to their standardized clinical assessment counterparts. We recruited 21 chronic stroke survivors with severe hemiparesis to complete 2 clinical assessments (Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test, Grooved Pegboard Test) and 2 kinematic assessments on the Kinereach motion tracking system (a simple reaching task and a cognitively challenging reaching task). We found moderate-to-weak correlations between the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and each of the kinematic outcomes. The clinical assessments had weak correlations with the FIM. Thus, kinematic assessments provided no significant advantage over clinical assessments in predicting functional independence.
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.