Miyata K, Takeda R, Kotajima K, Takahashi Y, Akiyama H, Hayashi S, et al. External Validation of the Walking Independence Prognostic Model TWIST Score After Stroke: A Multicenter, Prospective Cohort Study. Neurorehabilitation and neural repair. 2026;40(6):472-481. DOI 10.1177/15459683261418670
This note indexes a cited or audit-added source. It may be an original study, review, guideline, form or methods reference. Treat the specific design and the evidence below as authoritative; a source note is not automatically a primary study.
DOI: 10.1177/15459683261418670
Bibliographic record from the original reports
Access labels embedded in these original reference strings are historical. Current access and exact checked components are stated separately below.
Miyata K, Takeda R, Kotajima K, Takahashi Y, Akiyama H, Hayashi S, et al. External Validation of the Walking Independence Prognostic Model TWIST Score After Stroke: A Multicenter, Prospective Cohort Study. Neurorehabilitation and neural repair. 2026;40(6):472-481. DOI 10.1177/15459683261418670 Source examined: Complete licensed publisher HTML text; main tables examined.
Conditions: COND-STROKE Stroke
Scoped audit evidence
These are source- and component-level audit summaries as of 3 October 2026. Access and comparison scope can differ by report; none certifies every result or the underlying raw data.
Stroke gait — gait
- current access statement: Current audit access: licensed_body_source_inconsistency. Prior claims of licensed reading are not re-certified merely from present availability.
- source access: licensed_body_source_inconsistency
The original confirms 179 recruited, 145 analysed, 34 losses/deaths, 88 independent by 9 weeks, 17 additional by 26 weeks and 40 dependent. Table 2 matches every reported C-statistic, Brier score and slope; four-week calibration-in-the-large CI crosses zero. Missing predictors, missForest and the sensitivity analyses are described.
Source locator: audit evidence record L145–216 (Methods), L219–280 (sample and outcomes), L299–331 (Table2 and sensitivity results), L334–386 (Discussion); original HTML in audit evidence record
Limitations: The article defines calibration-in-the-large as a raw probability difference yet reports values below−1; computational reuse needs clarification. It mislabels dependence percentages as independence and gives conflicting score-specific calibration descriptions. The report correctly flags these source inconsistencies. Predictors are described at one week;5–8 days specifically describes other baseline assessments.
Reports citing this source
- Gait assessment and prognosis after stroke · reference 23 · original reference
Update record
- 2026-10-03: Created from the supplied reports and final scoped audit. New evidence should be appended with source version, access date, exact locator and affected report links.
Updating the wiki · Evidence and status guide