Trial reportScientific reports2026
A pilot study of peripheral magnetic stimulation combined with physical therapy for motor function in early acute stroke survivors with sensory ataxic hemiparesis.
Trial report 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Patients with sensory ataxic hemiparesis face a poorer recovery prognosis than those with pure motor deficits. We explored the feasibility and efficacy of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) combined with physical therapy (PT) for improving upper extremity (UE) function in early acute stroke survivors. Eighteen Participants were randomized to rPMS group (20 min rPMS + 20 min PT) or conventional PT group (40 min PT). Outcomes (the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT), the UE motor section of the Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment Scale (FMA-UE), and the Thumb Localizing Test (TLT)) were primarily analyzed using duration-corrected gain (gain normalized by sessions) to account for a significant dose imbalance (rPMS mean 6.5 vs. Control mean 12.8 sessions). A robustness ANCOVA was performed on the FMA-UE Post-score, adjusting for baseline scores and dose. The rPMS group received fewer total sessions but demonstrated significantly greater gains in WMFT and FMA-UE after dose correction. The ANCOVA confirmed a robust and statistically significant treatment effect on FMA-UE Post-score (F(1,11) = 5.984, p = 0.032). TLT showed a moderate effect size (r = 0.44). rPMS combined with PT is feasible and significantly enhances the rate of UE motor recovery, even after rigorous statistical adjustment for dose imbalance. Future studies in larger cohorts are warranted.Trial registration: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (February 1, 2019) https//www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/. Unique identifier UMIN000047323.
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.