ArticleJapanese journal of comprehensive rehabilitation science2025
Predictive accuracy of multiple regression analysis stratified into four groups of admission motor FIM based on decision tree analysis.
Article in Japanese journal of comprehensive rehabilitation science, 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.
- Significance of updating discharge FIM prediction at one month after admission using multiple regression analysis.Japanese journal of comprehensive rehabilitation science · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tokunaga M, Sannomiya K. Predictive accuracy of multiple regression analysis stratified into four groups of admission motor FIM based on decision tree analysis. Jpn J Compr Rehabil Sci 2025; 16: 68-73. Objective: Factors affecting improvement in the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) differ among patient subgroups, and therefore several studies have performed multiple regression analyses after stratifying patients by relevant factors. However, the optimal variables and criteria for stratification remain unclear. Decision tree analysis can identify contributing variables and branching criteria for stratification. This study aimed to compare the predictive accuracy of multiple regression analysis stratified based on decision tree analysis with that of conventional multiple regression analysis. Methods: We included 1,100 stroke patients admitted to a convalescent rehabilitation ward. Based on the decision tree results reported by Okamoto et al., patients were stratified into four groups according to admission motor FIM scores: 13-18, 19-30, 31-53, and 54-90. Stepwise multiple regression analysis was then performed with discharge motor FIM as the dependent variable. We compared the predictive performance of a single regression equation derived from conventional multiple regression with that of four equations derived from stratified analyses by calculating the residual sum of squares and comparing the absolute residuals using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: The conventional single equation yielded a median absolute residual of 7.5 points and a residual sum of squares of 14.7 × 10 Conclusion: Stratifying patients into four groups based on decision tree analysis improved the predictive accuracy of multiple regression analysis.
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.