ArticleArchives of physiotherapy
Investigating the clinical pattern of motor relearning in people with multiple sclerosis.
Article in Archives of physiotherapy. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Understanding how people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) acquire motor skills during rehabilitation is essential for optimizing treatment strategies. Motor learning theory suggests that skill acquisition follows predictable trajectories, but the time course and variability of learning during task-oriented rehabilitation remain poorly defined in PwMS. The aim was to investigate the learning trajectory and performance variability in PwMS undergoing task-oriented rehabilitation, using mathematical modeling of behavioral changes over time. Methods: This longitudinal prospective study included 44 PwMS admitted to a rehabilitation unit. Participants received either balance-specific or non-specific motor impairment treatments. Balance performance was assessed with the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) after each session. Session-to-session changes were analyzed using linear and exponential models to characterize the learning pattern, and residuals were examined to quantify variability. Results: An exponential mixed model (Akaike information criterion (AIC) = 2514.1) best described learning trajectories and provided more accurate estimates of pre-to-post improvement compared to a linear model (AIC = 2672.1). Performance variability decreased across sessions, from 1.16 to 0.75 points. Participants receiving specific balance treatment reached the minimal clinically important difference after three sessions, while participants receiving non-specific treatments achieved MCID only after 7 sessions. Conclusions: Motor performance changes in PwMS during rehabilitation resemble motor learning in healthy individuals: improvements follow an exponential function and are accompanied by reduced variability. Treatment specificity enhances the velocity and magnitude of learning, underscoring the importance of targeted interventions in neurorehabilitation.
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.