ReviewArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2026
Recovery After Nontraumatic Lower Limb Amputation: A Scoping Review of Longitudinal Research Studies.
Review 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. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Longitudinal research studies are essential for understanding the time course of functional recovery after lower limb amputation (LLA). The purpose of this scoping review was to evaluate the existing evidence base regarding midterm to long-term outcomes following nontraumatic LLA. Data Sources: A scoping review was conducted per the Joanna Briggs Institute and Open Science Framework guidelines. Based on purpose, 7 databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, SportDiscus, and Google Scholar) were searched for studies published between 2000 and 2024, in English, Mandarin Chinese, Tagalog, Persian, or Spanish. Study Selection: Eligible studies must include ≥50% of participants with nontraumatic major LLA within 3 years after their amputation and report outcomes at ≥2 time points spanning ≥3 months. Data Extraction: We extracted data including study design, phase of rehabilitation, duration of follow-up, participant characteristics, outcome measures used, and intervention purpose and types. Data Synthesis: Of 5936 records screened, 85 were included in this review. Most studies were conducted in Europe (42.4%), with much less representation from Asia, Oceania/Australia/New Zealand, Africa, and Latin America. The studies encompass data from a total of 424,422 participants (mean age: 58.3y; 55% men). Specific to time since amputation, 57 studies (67%) started immediately after amputation, and only 21% of studies followed patients beyond 1 year postamputation. The most commonly reported outcome domains are performance-based (19.5%), psychological (18.3%), and other medical outcomes (17.2%). Of the 174 unique outcome measures identified, 55.7% are patient-reported, and 44.2% are performance-based measures. Conclusions: This review highlights a growing body of evidence regarding longitudinal recovery after nontraumatic LLA. The current evidence base focuses primarily on the perioperative phase. Identified gaps in research include disparity in geographical and population representation, lack of long-term follow-up, and lack of participation outcomes such as social reintegration and returning to work.
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.