Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41295549›Full record

ArticleClinical rehabilitation2026

Standardisation in acute stroke research: A scoping review of upper limb assessments against Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable (SRRR) benchmarks.

Milica Doric, Lisa Tedesco Triccas, Mingyao Xiong, Faye Tabone, Adrian L Knorz, Nicole Downar, Nick S Ward, Catharina Zich

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Milica DoricDepartment of Clinical and Movement Neuroscience, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, UK.
Lisa Tedesco TriccasDepartment of Clinical and Movement Neuroscience, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, UK.
Mingyao XiongDepartment of Clinical and Movement Neuroscience, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, UK.
Faye TaboneWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Adrian L KnorzWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7924-0394
Nicole DownarWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Nick S WardDepartment of Clinical and Movement Neuroscience, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, UK.
Catharina ZichDepartment of Clinical and Movement Neuroscience, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0705-9297

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

ObjectiveTo examine how well acute stroke studies assessing upper limb sensorimotor capacity align with the Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable (SRRR) recommendations, focussing on the type of assessment tools used, study and participant characteristics, follow-up timings, and the use of clinical and multimodal data.DesignScoping review.Data sourcesEmbase, MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Google Scholar, and Web of Science were searched for relevant studies published between 01 August 2017 and 30 September 2025.MethodsThis review included studies involving adults with stroke who underwent upper limb assessment during the acute phase. Data were extracted on clinical, structural, and functional assessments, as well as follow-up timing, study, and participant characteristics. Of the 3628 identified articles, 132 met the inclusion criteria.ResultsWhile global assessments (e.g. NIH stroke scale [NIHSS]) and impairment-level upper limb assessments (e.g. Upper-extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment) were widely used, activity-level tools (e.g. Action Research Arm Test) were underrepresented. Structural brain imaging was common, though often used only diagnostically, while functional brain imaging and multimodal approaches were rare. Follow-up timing varied, with limited long-term tracking. Demographic reporting was inconsistent, with underrepresentation of young adults and women.ConclusionDespite progress, significant gaps remain in the standardisation and comprehensiveness of upper limb assessment in acute stroke research. Future studies should better align with SRRR recommendations to improve data comparability and scientific rigour.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingStrokeStroke RehabilitationUpper ExtremityFemaleHumansMaleRecovery of FunctionAcute strokemotor assessmentscoping reviewupper limb

Identifiers

PMID41295549
PMCPMC13013641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.