MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416538047 · doi:10.9734/jammr/2025/v37i125996

Effect of Functional Electrical Stimulation in Conjunction with Motor Relearning Program on Activities of Daily Living Following Ischemic Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2025· article· W4416538047 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rakesh Kumar Singh, Shailendra Mehta

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advances in Medicine and Medical Research · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActivities of daily livingFunctional Independence MeasureRehabilitationFunctional electrical stimulationRandomized controlled trialStroke (engine)Barthel indexIschemic stroke

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Ischemic stroke frequently results in upper limb impairment, significantly affecting patients' ability to perform activities of daily living (ADL). Functional electrical stimulation (FES) combined with motor relearning programs has emerged as a promising rehabilitation approach for improving functional outcomes in stroke survivors. Objective: The present study evaluates the effectiveness of FES combined with motor relearning programs on ADL performance in patients with upper limb impairment following ischemic stroke. Methods: A randomised controlled trial was conducted with 84 ischemic stroke patients (mean age 58.4±12.3 years) with upper limb hemiplegia. Participants were randomly allocated to either the experimental group (n=42) receiving FES combined with motor relearning program, or the control group (n=42) receiving conventional physiotherapy. The intervention period was 6 weeks, with 5 sessions per week. The primary outcome measure was the Barthel Index (BI), and secondary outcomes included the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). Assessments were conducted at baseline, post-intervention (6 weeks), and follow-up (12 weeks). Results: Both groups showed significant improvements in ADL scores, but the experimental group demonstrated superior outcomes. At 6 weeks, the experimental group showed greater improvement in BI scores (mean difference: 15.8±8.4 vs. 8.2±6.1, p<0.001), FIM scores (mean difference: 22.3±10.7 vs. 12.1±7.9, p<0.001), and COPM performance scores (mean difference: 3.4±1.2 vs. 1.8±0.9, p<0.001). These improvements were maintained at 12-week follow-up. Conclusion: FES combined with motor relearning programs significantly enhances ADL performance in ischemic stroke patients compared to conventional therapy alone. This combined approach offers a potentially effective rehabilitation approach for improving functional independence in stroke survivors.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.156
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.156
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.397 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advances in Medicine and Medical ResearchSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207