ArticleBMJ open2021
Effectiveness of robotic-assisted therapy for upper extremity function in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy: a systematic review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Pediatric Patients With Hemiplegia: A Systematic Review of a Randomized Controlled Trial.Cureus · 2023Review
- A Review on Recent Advances of Cerebral Palsy.Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe application of advanced technologies in paediatric rehabilitation to improve performance and enhance everyday functioning shows considerable promise. The aims of this systematic review are to investigate the effectiveness of robotic-assisted therapy for upper extremity function in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy and to extend the scope of intervention from empirical evidence. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Multiple databases, including MEDLINE (Ovid), PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and IEEE Xplore, will be comprehensively searched for relevant randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies. The grey literature will be accessed on the ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global database, and a hand search from reference lists of previous articles will be performed. The papers written in English language will be considered, with no limitation on publication date. Two independent reviewers will identify eligible studies, evaluate the level of evidence (the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine) and appraise methodological quality and risk of bias (the Standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers from a variety of fields (QualSyst tool); the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Data will be appropriately extracted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline. A narrative synthesis will be provided to summarise the results, and a meta-analysis will be conducted if there is sufficient homogeneity across outcomes. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020205818. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this study. The findings will be disseminated via a peer-reviewed journal and international conferences.
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.