ArticleActa neurologica Belgica2026
A comparative analysis of the utilization of upper and lower extremity functions in mental chronometry tests in individuals with multiple sclerosis.
Article in Acta neurologica Belgica, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMental chronometry tests, including upper and lower extremity functions, evaluate the temporal congruence component of motor imagery. This study aimed to compare the utilization of upper and lower extremity functions in mental chronometry tests.
methodsThis study included 70 individuals with multiple sclerosis and was designed based on an a priori power analysis. Mental chronometry tests, including the Box and Block Test (BBT) and the Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), were administered, and execution times, motor imagery times, and mental chronometry ratios were compared between the most and least affected extremities.
resultsA significant difference was observed in execution times between the most and least affected extremities in BBT (p = 0.001). Similarly, motor imagery times in BBT were significantly different between most and least affected extremities (p = 0.009). However, no significant difference was found in mental chronometry ratio between the most and least affected extremities (p = 0.179). Comparisons between upper and lower extremity tests revealed that the mental chronometry ratio was significantly higher for BBT than for TUG test in both the most affected and least affected extremities (p = 0.001).
conclusionIndividuals with MS showed differences in imagery-execution congruence between upper- and lower-extremity mental chronometry tasks, with higher congruence observed in the upper-extremity task. These findings support a task-specific interpretation of motor imagery performance rather than a generalized advantage of upper-extremity motor imagery.
trial registrationNot applicable. This study was observational and did not involve a clinical trial registration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41627710What 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.