SynthesisFrontiers in neurology
The effect of non-immersive virtual reality on upper limb motor function and activities of daily living in stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: Stroke is a leading cause of disability, with upper limb dysfunction affecting the majority of survivors. Non-immersive virtual reality (NIVR) has emerged as an accessible and engaging adjunctive therapy that may address the limitations of conventional rehabilitation and promote motor recovery. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis, conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, included 12 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 498 stroke patients. The included studies compared NIVR combined with conventional therapy versus conventional therapy alone. Primary outcome measures were upper limb motor function, assessed using the Fugl-Meyer Assessment for Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) and the Box and Block Test (BBT), and activities of daily living (ADL), assessed using the Barthel Index (BI), Modified Barthel Index (MBI), and Functional Independence Measure (FIM). Dose matching was reported in nine of the 12 studies; three studies provided extra therapy time to NIVR groups. The search was limited to PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, potentially missing studies from other databases (e.g., CENTRAL, Embase, CINAHL) and trial registries. Results: NIVR was associated with significantly improved upper limb motor function [FMA-UE: MD = 5.40, 95% CI (1.58, 9.22); BBT: MD = 4.57, 95% CI (0.35, 8.79)] and FIM scores [MD = 5.99, 95% CI (2.27, 9.71)]. Pooled BI/MBI analysis showed a marginal effect that reached statistical significance [MD = 5.47, 95% CI (0.30, 10.63), Conclusion: NIVR as an adjunct is associated with better upper limb function and global ADL. However, dose imbalance in 3/12 studies and limited database search (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus) warrant cautious interpretation. Findings need confirmation via dose-matched, broader-search trials.
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.