ArticleCureus2026
Effectiveness of Bilateral Arm Training on Upper Limb Functional Mobility in Stroke Survivors.
Article in Cureus, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPoor upper limb use resulting from stroke often negatively affects independence and the ability to perform activities of daily living. Furthermore, impairments in motor control and coordination can hinder rehabilitation efforts to recover upper extremity functional mobility after a stroke; hence, the use of bilateral arm training (BAT) may aid in this recovery. BAT aids recovery by promoting interhemispheric communication, decreasing non-use, and promoting symmetry during movement. PURPOSE: Our purpose was to investigate the efficacy of BAT for upper extremity functional mobility in stroke survivors.
methodTwenty-six stroke survivors were sampled using a convenience sampling method in an experimental pre-post design. Participants were divided into two groups (A and B). Participants in Group A engaged in conventional exercise, while those in Group B engaged in BAT. Each group performed four training sessions per week for four weeks; both groups were assessed for upper extremity function using the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of the Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) and Action Research Arm Test (ARAT).
resultsBoth Group A and Group B showed significant improvement in Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) and ARAT scores after treatment. However, Group B demonstrated greater improvement than Group A, with highly significant results (p<0.0001).
conclusionOverall, both interventions resulted in improved functional mobility of the upper limbs in stroke survivors. However, participants receiving BAT experienced greater improvement than those receiving conventional exercises in both motor recovery and functional performance of their arms. Thus, the intervention provided to Group B (BAT) was determined to be more effective than the intervention provided to Group A (conventional exercises) in improving upper limb function during stroke 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.