ArticleTelemedicine reports2024
Teleassessments of Lower Limb Function in Adult Stroke Survivors: A Preliminary Study Evaluating Safety, Feasibility, and Validity for Telerehabilitation.
Article in Telemedicine reports, 2024. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Lower limb function teleassessments in adult stroke survivors are critical due to the rise of telerehabilitation. This preliminary study aims to establish the safety, feasibility, and validity of teleassessments, exploring their predictive capacity for walking speed. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 17 chronic stroke participants (11 males, 6 females; mean age: 63 ± 8) underwent lab-based and tele-based assessment sessions. Outcome measures included the 30-second chair stand test (30CST), five times sit-to-stand (5XSTS), and 2-minute step test (TMST). 10-Meter walk test categorized participants into slow versus fast (below/above 0.8 m/s). Absolute agreement and bias analyses determined teleassessment validity, while sensitivity and specificity analyses evaluated their effectiveness in classifying slow versus fast walkers. Results: Absolute agreements were good for 30CST (ICC = 0.885), poor for 5XSTS (ICC = 0.148), and excellent for TMST (ICC = 0.971). 30CST ( Discussion: 30CST and TMST demonstrated adaptability for remote assessment via videoconferencing, establishing their safety, feasibility, and validity. These findings advocate for integrating teleassessments into adult stroke survivors' telerehabilitation programs.
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.