ArticlePloS one2026
Validating the 2-minute walk test MCID for subacute stroke patients: A Pakistani multicenter cohort analysis.
Article in PloS one, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe 2-Minute Walk Test (2MWT) is a simple and reliable test used by clinicians to evaluate mobility gains in stroke populations.
objectiveTo determine the minimally clinically important difference (MCID) for the 2-Minute Walk Test (2MWT) in subacute stroke populations.
designThis was a prospective cohort study.
settingThe study was carried out across seven rehabilitation centers in Pakistan.
participants150 adults (<180 days post-stroke),with a confirmed ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, able to walk at least 10 meters, and Mini-Mental State Examination score ≥24.
interventionsParticipants underwent 6-8 weeks of standard rehabilitation, including physical therapy (gait and balance training) and, in some centers, robotic gait training. Interventions varied by center but followed standardized gait and balance goals.
main outcome measuresThe 2MWT was the primary outcome measure whereas, the Activities-specific Balance Confidence gait subscale (ABC_Gait), Global Perceived Effect (GPE) scale, and Modified Barthel Index (MBI) were the secondary outcome measures. The MCID was estimated using an anchor-based approach (ABC_Gait ≥10% improvement), validated by distribution-based methods.
resultsThe 2MWT MCID was 33 meters (95% CI: 30-36 meters), with 87% sensitivity and 82% specificity. A strong correlation was observed between 2MWT and ABC_Gait change scores (r = 0.68, p < 0.001). The mean 2MWT distance improved from 62.5 ± 38.4 meters to 98.7 ± 42.1 meters (p < 0.001). Subgroup analyses showed that MCID was consistent across age groups, stroke types, and intervention modalities.
conclusionThe 33 meters MCID for the 2MWT is a reliable and patient-centered benchmark for assessing mobility gains in subacute stroke populations. Validation in chronic stroke populations and exploration of emerging interventions like virtual reality (VR) is needed to extend the 2MWT MCID's applicability.
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.