SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2025
Effects of robotic-assisted upper extremity therapy for stroke patients in different recovery phases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 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.
- Implementing Rehabilitation Robotics in Routine Care: A Mapping Review of Service Delivery Models, Implementation Determinants, Strategies, and Real-World Outcomes.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Robot-Assisted Rehabilitation as a Form of Progressive Therapy in Upper Extremity Motor Recovery After Stroke: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To systematically evaluate the efficacy of robotic-assisted therapy on upper extremity recovery after stroke through stratified meta-analysis, assessing the influence of disease phase, injury severity, device type, training parameters, and follow-up duration. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception to July 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing robotic-assisted with conventional upper limb therapy in adult stroke patients. Results: Analysis of 42 RCTs ( Conclusion: Robotic-assisted therapy significantly improves upper extremity motor function and activities of daily living after stroke, with clinically meaningful gains particularly evident in subacute patients and those with severe impairment. Benefits in grip strength and social participation were statistically significant but of uncertain clinical importance due to methodological limitations. These findings support a stratified rehabilitation approach, prioritizing subacute and severely impaired patients for robotic intervention to maximize functional outcomes. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42025640276, CRD42025640276.
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.