The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Is More Better? Using Metadata to Explore Dose–Response Relationships in Stroke Rehabilitation
Open accessAbstract
Background and Purpose—: Neurophysiological models of rehabilitation and recovery suggest that a large volume of specific practice is required to induce the neuroplastic changes that underlie behavioral recovery. The primary objective of this meta-analysis was to explore the relationship between time scheduled for therapy and improvement in motor therapy for adults after stroke by (1) comparing high doses to low doses and (2) using metaregression to quantify the dose–response relationship further. Methods—: Databases were searched to find randomized controlled trials that were not dosage matched for total time scheduled for therapy. Regression models were used to predict improvement during therapy as a function of total time scheduled for therapy and years after stroke. Results—: Overall, treatment groups receiving more therapy improved beyond control groups that received less ( g =0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.26–0.45). Furthermore, increased time scheduled for therapy was a significant predictor of increased improvement by itself and when controlling for linear and quadratic effects of time after stroke. Conclusions—: There is a positive relationship between the time scheduled for therapy and therapy outcomes. These data suggest that large doses of therapy lead to clinically meaningful improvements, controlling for time after stroke. Currently, trials report time scheduled for therapy as a measure of therapy dose. Preferable measures of dose would be active time in therapy or repetitions of an exercise.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package
Viechtbauer, W. (2010) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v036.i03 · Cited by 20,464
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009) · doi:10.1002/9780470743386 · Cited by 14,225
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021) · doi:10.1002/9781119558378 · Cited by 9,799
Utilization of the PICO framework to improve searching PubMed for clinical questions
Schardt, C., Adams, M. B., Owens, T., Keitz, S., & Fontelo, P. (2007) · BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · doi:10.1186/1472-6947-7-16 · Cited by 3,053
Robot-Assisted Therapy for Long-Term Upper-Limb Impairment after Stroke
Lo, A. C., Guarino, P. D., Richards, L. G., Haselkorn, J. K., Wittenberg, G. F., Federman, D. G., Ringer, R. J., Wagner, T. H., Krebs, H. I., Volpe, B. T., et al. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa0911341 · Cited by 1,397
Effects of Augmented Exercise Therapy Time After Stroke: A Meta-Analysis
Kwakkel, G., van Peppen, R., Wagenaar, R. C., Wood Dauphinee, S., Richards, C., Ashburn, A., Miller, K., Lincoln, N., Partridge, C., Wellwood, I., et al. (2004) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.0000143153.76460.7d · Cited by 1,081
Understanding the pattern of functional recovery after stroke: Facts and theories
Kwakkel, G., Kollen, B., & Lindeman, E. (2004) · Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience · doi:10.3233/rnn-2004-00282 · Cited by 727
Very Early Constraint-Induced Movement during Stroke Rehabilitation (VECTORS): A single-center RCT
Dromerick, A. W., Lang, C. E., Birkenmeier, R. L., Wagner, J. M., Miller, J. P., Videen, T. O., Powers, W. J., Wolf, S. L., & Edwards, D. F. (2009) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181ab2b27 · Cited by 399
Self-citation
Cited by
Advances and challenges in stroke rehabilitation
Stinear, C. M., Lang, C. E., Zeiler, S., & Byblow, W. D. (2020) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(19)30415-6 · Cited by 792
Self-citationA soft robotic exosuit improves walking in patients after stroke
Awad, L. N., Bae, J., O’Donnell, K., De Rossi, S. M. M., Hendron, K., Sloot, L. H., Kudzia, P., Allen, S., Holt, K. G., Ellis, T. D., et al. (2017) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.aai9084 · Cited by 672
Intensive upper limb neurorehabilitation in chronic stroke: outcomes from the Queen Square programme
Ward, N. S., Brander, F., & Kelly, K. (2019) · Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry · doi:10.1136/jnnp-2018-319954 · Cited by 341
Forman, D. E., Arena, R., Boxer, R., Dolansky, M. A., Eng, J. J., Fleg, J. L., Haykowsky, M., Jahangir, A., Kaminsky, L. A., Kitzman, D. W., et al. (2017) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000483 · Cited by 319
Kim, W.-S., Cho, S., Ku, J., Kim, Y., Lee, K., Hwang, H.-J., & Paik, N.-J. (2020) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm9103369 · Cited by 226
Metadata
- Authors
- Lohse, K. R., Lang, C. E., & Boyd, L. A.
- Venue
- Stroke
- Published
- 2014-07
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 2053-2058
- ISSN
- 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4628
- OpenAlex
- W1969450508
- Cited by
- 637
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 36.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Is More Better? Using Metadata to Explore Dose–Response Relationships in Stroke Rehabilitation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/strokeaha.114.004695
- The paper
- Lohse, K. R., Lang, C. E., & Boyd, L. A. (2014). Is More Better? Using Metadata to Explore Dose–Response Relationships in Stroke Rehabilitation. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.114.004695
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
