ArticleBMJ open2019
Effects of camera-based mirror visual feedback therapy for patients who had a stroke and the neural mechanisms involved: protocol of a multicentre randomised control study.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mirror therapy reduces excessive variability of motor network in stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2025Trial
- Evidence of mirror therapy for recruitment of ipsilateral motor pathways in stroke recovery: A resting fMRI study.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2024Trial
- Associated Mirror Therapy Enhances Motor Recovery of the Upper Extremity and Daily Function after Stroke: A Randomized Control Study.Neural plasticity · 2021Trial
- The effects of mirror visual feedback involved network priming on embodiment perception in healthy subjects: a proof-of-concept study.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Combination of robot-assisted glove and mirror therapy improves upper limb motor function in subacute stroke patients: a randomized controlled pilot study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Neurophysiological Oscillatory Mechanisms Underlying the Effect of Mirror Visual Feedback-Induced Illusion of Hand Movements on Nociception and Cortical Activation.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Emerging Limb Rehabilitation Therapy After Post-stroke Motor Recovery.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Review
- Mirror Visual Feedback Prior to Robot-Assisted Training Facilitates Rehabilitation After Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Study.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Mirror Visual Feedback Combining Vibrotactile Stimulation Promotes Embodiment Perception: An Electroencephalogram (EEG) Pilot Study.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAs a combination of visual stimulation and motor imagery, mirror visual feedback (MVF) is an effective treatment for motor impairment after stroke; however, few studies have investigated its effects on relevant cognitive processes such as visual perception and motor imagery. Camera-based MVF (camMVF) overcomes the intrinsic limitations of real mirrors and is recognised as an optimal setup. This study aims to investigate the effects of camMVF as an adjunct treatment for stroke patients, compare camMVF outcomes with those of conventional therapy and elucidate neural mechanisms through which MVF influences cognition and brain networks. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be a multicentre, single-blinded, randomised controlled trial including 90 patients randomised into three groups: camera-based mirror visual feedback intervention group (30), shielded mirror visual feedback intervention group (30) and conventional group (30). Patients in each group will receive a 60 min intervention 5 days per week over 4 weeks. The primary outcome will be the Fugl-Meyer Assessment Upper Limb subscale measurement. Secondary outcomes include the modified Ashworth Scale, Grip Strength test, Modified Barthel Index, Functional Independence Measure, Berg Balance Scale, 10-metre walking test, hand-laterality task and electroencephalography . ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was granted by the Huashan Hospital Institutional Review Board on 15 March (KY2017-230). We plan to submit the results to a peer-reviewed journal and present them at conferences, rehabilitation forums and to the general public. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR-INR-17013644; Pre-results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.