Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36357483›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Body weight-supported gait training for patients with spinal cord injury: a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Fu-An Yang, Shih-Ching Chen, Jing-Fang Chiu, Ya-Chu Shih, Tsan-Hon Liou, Reuben Escorpizo, Hung-Chou Chen

Open access · goldAbstract readNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.8field-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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Fu-An YangSchool of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Shih-Ching ChenTaiwan Society of Neurorehabilitation, Taipei, Taiwan.
Jing-Fang ChiuDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, No. 291 Zhongjheng Road, Zhonghe District, New Taipei City, 235, Taiwan.
Ya-Chu ShihSchool of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Tsan-Hon LiouDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Reuben EscorpizoDepartment of Rehabilitation and Movement Science, University of Vermont, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Burlington, VT, USA.
Hung-Chou ChenTaiwan Society of Neurorehabilitation, Taipei, Taiwan. 10462@s.tmu.edu.tw.
Taipei Medical University · TWSwiss Paraplegic Research · CHTaipei Medical University-Shuang Ho Hospital · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Different body weight-supported gait-training strategies are available for improving ambulation in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). These include body weight-supported overground training (BWSOGT), body weight-supported treadmill training (BWSTT), and robot-assisted gait training (RAGT). We conducted a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the effect and priority of each training protocol. We searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Embase databases from inception to 6 August 2022. The eligibility criteria were as follows: (1) being RCTs, (2) recruiting participants with SCI diagnosis and requiring gait training, (3) comparing different body weight-supported gait training strategies, and (4) involving ambulatory assessments. We conducted a network meta-analysis to compare different training strategies using the standard mean difference and its 95% credible interval. To rank the efficacy of training strategies, we used the P score as an indicator. Inconsistency in network meta-analysis was evaluated using loop-specific heterogeneity. We included 15 RCTs in this analysis. RAGT was had significantly more favourable performance than had the control intervention. The ranking probabilities indicated that the most effective approach was RAGT, followed by BWSOGT, BWSTT, and the control intervention. No significant inconsistency was noted between the results of the direct and indirect comparisons.

Indexed as

RoboticsSpinal Cord InjuriesBody WeightExercise TherapyGaitHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID36357483
PMCPMC9649733
OpenAlexW4308702472

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.