Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29920979›Full record

SynthesisBrain and behavior2018

Physical fitness interventions for nonambulatory stroke survivors: A mixed-methods systematic review and meta-analysis.

Megan Lloyd, Dawn A Skelton, Gillian E Mead, Brian Williams, Frederike van Wijck

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Brain and behavior, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. A Systematic Scoping Review of Poststroke Engagement in Physical Activity.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Users' experience of community-based power assisted exercise: a transition from NHS to third sector services.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Megan LloydSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
Dawn A SkeltonSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
Gillian E MeadGeriatric Medicine, Division of Health Sciences, Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, and the Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh, UK.
Brian WilliamsSchool of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK.
Frederike van WijckSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0855-799X
Glasgow Caledonian University · GBEdinburgh Napier University · GBEdinburgh Royal Infirmary · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPhysical fitness training after stroke is recommended in guidelines across the world, but evidence pertains mainly to ambulatory stroke survivors. Nonambulatory stroke survivors (FAC score ≤2) are at increased risk of recurrent stroke due to limited physical activity. This systematic review aimed to synthesize evidence regarding case fatality, effects, experiences, and feasibility of fitness training for nonambulatory stroke survivors.

methodsEight major databases were searched for any type of study design. Two independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data, and assessed study quality, using published tools. Random-effects meta-analysis was used. Following their separate analysis, qualitative and quantitative data were synthesized using a published framework.

resultsOf 13,614 records, 33 studies involving 910 nonambulatory participants met inclusion criteria. Most studies were of moderate quality. Interventions comprised assisted walking (25 studies), cycle ergometer training (5 studies), and other training (3 studies), mainly in acute settings. Case fatality did not differ between intervention (1.75%) and control (0.88%) groups (95% CI 0.13-3.78, p = 0.67). Compared with control interventions, assisted walking significantly improved: fat mass, peak heart rate, peak oxygen uptake and walking endurance, maximum walking speed, and mobility at intervention end, and walking endurance, balance, mobility, and independent walking at follow-up. Cycle ergometry significantly improved peak heart rate, work load, peak ventilation, peak carbon dioxide production, HDL cholesterol, fasting insulin and fasting glucose, and independence at intervention end. Effectiveness of other training could not be established. There were insufficient qualitative data to draw conclusions about participants' experiences, but those reported were positive. There were few intervention-related adverse events, and dropout rate ranged from 12 to 20%.

conclusionsFindings suggest safety, effectiveness, and feasibility of adapted fitness training for screened nonambulatory stroke survivors. Further research needs to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness as well as experiences of fitness training-especially for chronic stroke survivors in community settings.

Indexed as

Mobility LimitationPhysical FitnessAdultExercise TherapyFemaleHumansResearch DesignStrokeStroke RehabilitationSurvivorsexercisefitnessnonambulatoryrehabilitationstrokesystematic review

Identifiers

PMID29920979
PMCPMC6043697
OpenAlexW2809287078

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.