ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024
Robot-assisted therapy in stratified intervention: a randomized controlled trial on poststroke motor recovery.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effects of robotic-assisted upper extremity therapy for stroke patients in different recovery phases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Pooled it
- The effectiveness of theta burst stimulation for motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review.European journal of medical research · 2024Pooled it
- Trial
- Comparative effects of resistance- and assistance-based robot training on brain activation and motor recovery in stroke patients.Frontiers in neurologyTrial
- Embodied Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: A Systematic Review of Robotic Perception, Decision-Making, and Clinical Impact.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- 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
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the effects of robot-assisted therapy with conventional therapy for accelerating stratified intervention in poststroke patients with upper limb dysfunction. Background: For stroke survivors, recovery of upper extremity function remains a major challenge in rehabilitation. Literature has suggested that the rate of recovery may improve if treatments can be individualized to their clinical profiles. However, there still lack clinical evidence on how to create treatment tailored to individual patients. Robot-assisted Therapy (RT) provides a straightforward approach to adjustment of the assistance-resistance continuum for individual patients. In early Brunnstrom stages of recovery, patients benefit from assistance training, whereas in later stages the training is favored with resistance. Therefore, RT may enhance Conventional Therapy (CT) but the use of RT in stratified intervention has not been investigated. This study evaluated the possible benefit of adopting RT following a protocol of upper-limb training, which was stratified with the Brunnstrom stage of each individual. Methods: This study was a single-blinded randomized controlled trial. A total of 53 patients with stroke were recruited and randomized into 2 groups (CT, Results: Across the 4-week intervention, participants in the RT group recovered 1.979 points of FMA-UE per week, compared to 1.198 points per week in the CT group (t Conclusion: Robot-assisted therapy showed initial evidence for the acceleration of post-stroke recovery of motor function in the upper limb. Initial observations suggested that patients in Brunnstrom recovery stage III might benefit the most from the stratified intervention assisted by robotics. Clinical trial registration: https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=61834, Identifier [ChiCTR2000039010]. Registered 13 March 2020.
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.