ArticleScientific reports2026
Predicting online motor learning after stroke in lower limb task using machine learning.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Online motor learning is central to effective learning and a crucial determinant of functional recovery after stroke. Despite its clinical significance, predictors of online motor learning remain understudied. Machine Learning (ML) offers a data-driven approach to identify predictors of online motor learning that would otherwise be limited using traditional statistical approaches, such as logistic regression. This study leveraged ML to determine key predictors and their relative importance in online motor learning after stroke. One hundred and seven stroke survivors completed assessments of sociodemographic, stroke characteristics, health-related, functional, cognitive, and physical capacity. Online motor learning was quantified using a goal-directed ankle task. To predict those with and without online motor learning capacity, we applied and compared XGBoost and logistic regression approaches. The XGBoost model outperformed logistic regression, achieving a precision = 0.82, recall = 0.78, F1 score = 0.80, and an area under the precision-recall curve = 0.84. The feature importance analysis identified logical memory, DGT-backward, selective attention, functional capacity index, and physical capacity as the key predictors of online motor learning. Online motor learning after stroke is not solely a motor-driven process but is predicted by cognitive and functional capacity. ML identified multidomain predictors, offering a framework for understanding individual differences in learning potential during the session, laying the foundation for precision rehabilitation.
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.