ReviewCureus2025
Psychological Interventions to Improve Upper Limb Motor Dysfunction Post-stroke: A Scoping Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cognitive strategies in post-stroke patients significantly influence upper limb motor function recovery. Integrating upper extremity and psychological interventions may enhance rehabilitation outcomes. This scoping review aimed to summarize studies evaluating the effectiveness of combining these approaches to improve upper extremity motor dysfunction in patients with post-stroke syndrome. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing combined upper extremity and psychological interventions versus upper extremity interventions alone were included. Studies published between November 25, 2024, and the study's conclusion were retrieved from PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. Only English-language studies were reviewed. Three RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Two studies utilized cognitive orientation to daily occupational performance (CO-OP), while one employed cognitive-oriented strategy training augmented rehabilitation (COSTAR). The CO-OP studies demonstrated that combined psychological and physical interventions significantly improved motor function compared to physical interventions alone. However, the COSTAR-based study reported greater efficacy for upper extremity interventions alone. This review highlighted the mixed efficacy of combined interventions. While CO-OP showed potential benefits, the COSTAR findings suggest variability in the effectiveness of different cognitive strategies. Both approaches prioritized activity and goal setting rather than directly targeting motor recovery. Although the findings are inconclusive, this is the first review to explore the role of combined psychological and upper extremity interventions for post-stroke motor dysfunction, providing a foundation for further research.
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.