Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33449202›Full record

ReviewJournal of neurology2022

Telerehabilitation in response to constrained physical distance: an opportunity to rethink neurorehabilitative routines.

Arturo Nuara, Maddalena Fabbri-Destro, Emilia Scalona, Stefano Elio Lenzi, Giacomo Rizzolatti, Pietro Avanzini

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Quality Appraisal of Telerehabilitation Guidelines: A Systematic Review.International journal of telemedicine and applications · 2026
    Review
  8. Telerehabilitation of patients with stroke: Initial program theories for successful implementation.PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. The Safety of Telerehabilitation: Systematic Review.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Breaking barriers in Parkinson's care: the multidisciplinary team approach.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2024
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Arturo NuaraConsiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Istituto di Neuroscienze, via Volturno 39/E, 43125, Parma, Italy. arturo.nuara@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9961-0738
Maddalena Fabbri-DestroConsiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Istituto di Neuroscienze, via Volturno 39/E, 43125, Parma, Italy.
Emilia ScalonaConsiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Istituto di Neuroscienze, via Volturno 39/E, 43125, Parma, Italy.
Stefano Elio LenziConsiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Istituto di Neuroscienze, via Volturno 39/E, 43125, Parma, Italy.
Giacomo RizzolattiConsiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Istituto di Neuroscienze, via Volturno 39/E, 43125, Parma, Italy.
Pietro AvanziniConsiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Istituto di Neuroscienze, via Volturno 39/E, 43125, Parma, Italy.
Neuroscience Institute · ITUniversity of Modena and Reggio Emilia · ITUniversity of Parma · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ensuring proper dosage of treatment and repetition over time is a major challenge in neurorehabilitation. However, a requirement of physical distancing to date compromises their achievement. While mostly associated to COVID-19, physical distancing is not only required in a pandemic scenario, but also advised for several clinical conditions (e.g. immunocompromised individuals) or forced for specific social contexts (e.g. people living in remote areas worldwide). All these contexts advocate for the implementation of alternative healthcare models. The objective of this perspective is to highlight the benefits of remote administration of rehabilitative treatment, namely telerehabilitation, in counteracting physical distancing barriers in neurorehabilitation. Sustaining boosters of treatment outcome, such as compliance, sustainability, as well as motivation, telerehabilitation may adapt to multiple neurological conditions, with the further advantage of a high potential for individualization to patient's or pathology's specificities. The effectiveness of telerehabilitation can be potentiated by several technologies available to date: virtual reality can recreate realistic environments in which patients may bodily operate, wearable sensors allow to quantitatively monitor the patient's performance, and signal processing may contribute to the prediction of long-term dynamics of patient recovery. Telerehabilitation might spark its advantages far beyond the mere limitation of physical distancing effects, mitigating criticalities of daily neurorehabilitative practice, and thus paving the way to the envision of mixed models of care, where hospital-based procedures are complementarily integrated with telerehabilitative ones.

Indexed as

COVID-19TelerehabilitationVirtual RealityHumansPhysical DistancingSARS-CoV-2Action observation treatmentPhysical distancingRemote rehabilitationSocial distancingVirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID33449202
PMCPMC7809551
OpenAlexW3118759489

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.