English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Clinical trials for acute stroke treatments have often used composite clinical rating scales as primary outcome measures of treatment efficacy. Recent preclinical and clinical studies highlight the opportunity to administer treatments in the subacute and chronic phase of stroke to promote neurological recovery. Because different neurological deficits recover to different extents at different rates after stroke, putative stroke recovery-promoting treatments may exert differential effects on various functional aspects of stroke recovery. For this reason, we propose that the use of modality-specific outcome measures may be best suited as primary end points in clinical trials of stroke recovery-promoting agents. The use of such end points may result in a more selective labeling of stroke recovery treatments.

The Case for Modality-Specific Outcome Measures in Clinical Trials of Stroke Recovery-Promoting Agents