Are we armed with the right data? Pooled individual data review of biomarkers in people with severe upper limb impairment after stroke
Abstract
To build an understanding of the neurobiology underpinning arm recovery in people with severe arm impairment due to stroke, we conducted a pooled individual data systematic review to: 1) characterize brain biomarkers; 2) determine relationship(s) between biomarkers and motor outcome; and 3) establish relationship(s) between biomarkers and motor recovery. Three electronic databases were searched up to October 2, 2015. Eligible studies included adults with severe arm impairment after stroke. Descriptive statistics were calculated to characterize brain biomarkers, and pooling of individual patient data was performed using mixed-effects linear regression to examine relationships between brain biomarkers and motor outcome and recovery. Thirty-eight articles including individual data from 372 people with severe arm impairment were analysed. The majority of individuals were in the chronic (> 6 months) phase post stroke (51%) and had a subcortical stroke (49%). The presence of a motor evoked potential (indexed by transcranial magnetic stimulation) was the only biomarker related to better motor outcome (p = 0.02). There was no relationship between motor outcome and stroke volume (cm3), location (cortical, subcortical, mixed) or side (left vs. right), and corticospinal tract asymmetry index (extracted from diffusion weighted imaging). Only one study had longitudinal data, thus no data pooling was possible to address change over time (preventing our third objective). Based on the…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 372 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Learning from First-Generation Qualitative Approaches in the IS Discipline: An Evolutionary View and Some Implications for Authors and Evaluators (PART 1/2)
- Commentary on the clinical and preclinical dosage limits of interstitially administered magnetic fluids for therapeutic hyperthermia based on current practice and efficacy models
- Prosthesis: New Technological Opportunities and Innovative Biomedical Devices
- The history and future of neural modeling for cochlear implants
- Ryanodine receptors: waking up from refractoriness
- Novel Transgenic Rabbit Model Sheds Light on the Puzzling Role of Matrix Metalloproteinase-12 in Atherosclerosis
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.