Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 698

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinically Important Differences for the Upper-Extremity Fugl-Meyer Scale in People With Minimal to Moderate Impairment Due to Chronic Stroke

Page, Stephen J., Fulk, George D., Boyne, Pierce·2012·Physical Therapy

Abstract

Background: The upper-extremity portion of the Fugl-Meyer Scale (UE-FM) is one of the most established and commonly used outcome measures in stroke rehabilitative trials. Empirical work is needed to determine the amount of change in UE-FM scores that can be regarded as important and clinically meaningful for health professionals, patients, and other stakeholders. Objective: This study used anchor-based methods to estimate the clinically important difference (CID) for the UE-FM in people with minimal to moderate impairment due to chronic stroke. Method: One hundred forty-six individuals with stable, mild to moderate upper-extremity (UE) hemiparesis were administered the UE-FM before and after an intervention targeting their affected UEs. The treating therapists rated each participant's perceived amount of UE motor recovery on a global rating of change (GROC) scale evaluating several facets of UE movement (grasp, release, move the affected UE, perform 5 important functional tasks with the affected UE, overall UE function). Estimated CID of the UE-FM scores was calculated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve with the GROC scores as the anchor. Results: The ROC curve analysis revealed that change in UE-FM scores during the intervention period distinguished participants who experienced clinically important improvement from those that did not based on the therapists' GROC scores. The area under the curve ranged from 0.61 to 0.70 for the different facets of UE movement. Conclusions: The estimated CID of the UE-FM scores ranged from 4.25 to 7.25 points, depending on the different facets of UE movement.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2522/ptj.20110009

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 698

Metadata

Authors
Page, S. J., Fulk, G. D., & Boyne, P.
Venue
Physical Therapy
Published
2012-06-01
Volume
92
Issue
6
Pages
791-798
ISSN
  • 0031-9023 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-6724
OpenAlex
W2122048922
Cited by
698
References
2
FWCI
12.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Clinically Important Differences for the Upper-Extremity Fugl-Meyer Scale in People With Minimal to Moderate Impairment Due to Chronic Stroke. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2522/ptj.20110009
The paper
Page, S. J., Fulk, G. D., & Boyne, P. (2012). Clinically Important Differences for the Upper-Extremity Fugl-Meyer Scale in People With Minimal to Moderate Impairment Due to Chronic Stroke. Physical Therapy. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20110009

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.