SynthesisReviews in cardiovascular medicine2025
Network Meta-Analysis on the Effects of Traditional Chinese Exercise on Stroke Patients.
Synthesis in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Stroke is a common cerebrovascular disease characterized by a high incidence rate, significant disability, frequent recurrence, and elevated mortality. Exercise plays a crucial role in stroke rehabilitation, yet the relationship between traditional Chinese exercise and stroke recovery remains unclear. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of various conventional Chinese exercises through a systematic network meta-analysis and identify the most effective interventions for improving the rehabilitation outcomes of stroke patients. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, and the China Science and Technology Journal Database (up to July 2024) to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating traditional Chinese exercises for stroke patients. Trials were included if they utilized at least one form of traditional Chinese exercise. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (ROB 2.0). Data analysis was performed using Stata 17.0 and the Mvmeta package, employing a random-effects model. Results: A total of 43 studies involving 2083 stroke patients were included. These studies assessed outcomes including upper limb motor function, lower limb motor function, overall motor ability, walking ability, balance ability, self-care ability, cognitive function, depression, quality of life, and sleep quality. Baduanjin, originating in the Song Dynasty and consisting of eight movements based on traditional Chinese medicine theories,was the most effective in improving upper limb motor function, overall motor ability, walking ability, self-care ability, cognitive function, quality of life, and sleep quality. Taiji, a practice integrating Chinese philosophy, martial arts, and wellness concepts, was the most effective in enhancing lower limb motor function. Wuqinxi, inspired by the dynamic movements of animals such as the tiger, deer, bear, apes, and birds, showed the best results for balance improvement. Liuzijue, a traditional exercise combining specific sound production, breathing, and movement, was most effective in alleviating depressive symptoms. Conclusions: These findings suggest that Baduanjin may be the most effective intervention for stroke rehabilitation. However, further high-quality RCTs are required to confirm these results. The PROSPERO registration: CRD42024566780, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024566780.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.