Key result
Initial impairment-based stroke recovery modeling explains ~64% of variance in 3-to-6-month upper limb outcomes.
Observational (n=489)
Yes
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Introduction Stroke causes different levels of impairment and the degree of recovery varies greatly between patients. The majority of recovery studies are biased towards patients with mild-to-moderate impairments, challenging a unified recovery process framework. Our aim was to develop a statistical framework to analyse recovery patterns in patients with severe and non-severe initial impairment and concurrently investigate whether they recovered differently. Methods We designed a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate 3–6 months upper limb Fugl-Meyer (FM) scores after stroke. When focusing on the explanation of recovery patterns, we addressed confounds affecting previous recovery studies and considered patients with FM-initial scores <45 only. We systematically explored different FM-breakpoints between severe/non-severe patients ( FM-initial =5–30). In model comparisons, we evaluated whether impairment-level-specific recovery patterns indeed existed. Finally, we estimated the out-of-sample prediction performance for patients across the entire initial impairment range. Results Recovery data was assembled from eight patient cohorts (n=489). Data were best modelled by incorporating two subgroups (breakpoint: FM-initial =10). Both subgroups recovered a comparable constant amount, but with different proportional components: severely affected patients recovered more the smaller their impairment, while non-severely affected patients recovered more the larger their initial impairment. Prediction of 3–6 months outcomes could be done with an R 2 =63.5% (95% CI=51.4% to 75.5%). Conclusions Our work highlights the benefit of simultaneously modelling recovery of severely-to-non-severely impaired patients and demonstrates both shared and distinct recovery patterns. Our findings provide evidence that the severe/non-severe subdivision in recovery modelling is not an artefact of previous confounds. The presented out-of-sample prediction performance may serve as benchmark to evaluate promising biomarkers of stroke recovery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bonkhoff et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Stroke (n=489). Initial impairment severity (severe vs non-severe) vs. Non-severe impairment was evaluated on 3-6 months upper limb Fugl-Meyer (FM) scores (R2 63.5%, 95% CI 51.4% to 75.5%). Modelling stroke recovery using a severe versus non-severe initial impairment subdivision demonstrated distinct recovery patterns and predicted 3-6 month outcomes with an R2 of 63.5%.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: