ArticleArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2026
Minimum Detectable Change and Minimal Clinically Important Difference for the Box and Block Test and Fugl-Meyer Assessment in Moderate to Severe Chronic Stroke.
Article in Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To quantify the Minimum Detectable Change (MDC) and the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) of the Box and Blocks Test (BBT) and Upper Extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA-UE), and to determine whether there is a BBT floor effect for individuals with chronic stroke and moderate to severe motor impairment. Design: Analysis of pre- and postinterventional data using anchor and distribution-based methods. Setting: Research laboratory. Participants: Fifty-three adults (N=53) with chronic stroke. Age (mean ± SD)=58.5±10.7; 71% men; mean time poststroke=7.4±6.8 years; baseline FMA=20.6±7.6. Interventions: Randomized controlled trial, including 24 sessions over 8 weeks. Each session included 40 trials of reach-grasp-retrieve-release practice using the ReIn-Hand, with or without robotic support of the arm weight. Main Outcome Measures: A BBT floor effect emerged among participants with baseline FMA-UE (FMA Conclusions: Because of its floor effect, the BBT may not be appropriate for those with severe motor impairment poststroke. MDC values for both BBT and FMA-UE depend on motor impairment severity and should be interpreted using regression model-based estimates. In valid ranges of BBT and FMA-UE, subjective perceived change (Global Rating of Change) showed limited association with them. Distribution-based MCID values were small but meaningful, though they may not reflect participants' perceived importance.
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.