Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35457472›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Using the TUG Test for the Functional Assessment of Patients with Selected Disorders.

Krzysztof Graff, Ewa Szczerbik, Małgorzata Kalinowska, Katarzyna Kaczmarczyk, Agnieszka Stępień, Małgorzata Syczewska

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Krzysztof GraffDepartment of Pediatric Rehabilitation, Children's Memorial Health Institute, 04-730 Warsaw, Poland.
Ewa SzczerbikDepartment of Pediatric Rehabilitation, Children's Memorial Health Institute, 04-730 Warsaw, Poland.
Małgorzata KalinowskaDepartment of Pediatric Rehabilitation, Children's Memorial Health Institute, 04-730 Warsaw, Poland.
Katarzyna KaczmarczykFaculty of Rehabilitation, Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw, 00-968 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-4110-8571
Agnieszka StępieńFaculty of Rehabilitation, Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw, 00-968 Warsaw, Poland.
Małgorzata SyczewskaDepartment of Pediatric Rehabilitation, Children's Memorial Health Institute, 04-730 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-8872-6476
Children's Memorial Health Institute · PLJózef Piłsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the tests used for quantitative diagnostics is Timed Up-and-Go (TUG), however, no reports were found regarding the percentage share of individual test components, which seems to have a greater diagnostic value in differentiating the functional status of the patients. The aim of the study was to analyze the percentage of the individual components of the TUG test in functional assessment in a population of healthy children and in clinical trials patients with various diseases. MATERIAL AND METHODOLOGY: The material consisted of patients with orthopedic (

resultsThe components of the TUG test that differentiated the studied groups of patients to the greatest extent were in the order: relapse tug3%, initial transition tug2%, sitting tug5% and standing up tug1%, while during the final transition tug4% statistically significant differences were found only between healthy children and the studied groups of patients.

conclusionsThe TUG test turned out to be a good diagnostic tool, differentiating the studied groups of patients. The analysis of the percentage of the components of the TUG test can help in assessing the mobility of children and adolescents, monitor the effects of physiotherapy or the effects of surgical procedures.

Indexed as

Neoplasm Recurrence, LocalPhysical Therapy ModalitiesAdolescentChildHumansMass Screeningchildrenpercentage of individual components of the TUG testTUG test

Identifiers

PMID35457472
PMCPMC9025107
OpenAlexW4223602058

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.