SynthesisJournal of neuromuscular diseases2026
The assistive gait devices and their implementation in activities of daily living for patients with neuromuscular disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of neuromuscular diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07072676 (The Use of Assistive Gait Devices Can Reduce the Risk of Falls in Patients With Neuromuscular Diseases Following a Training Period.), which is not on this 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.
The Use of Assistive Gait Devices Can Reduce the Risk of Falls in Patients With Neuromuscular Diseases Following a Training Period.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo date, assistive gait devices (AGDs) for people with neuromuscular diseases (NMDs) have not been systematically evaluated.
objectiveThis systematic review evaluated AGDs for people with NMDs.MethodsSuitable tools were used to assess the study quality and the certainty of evidence. If feasible, a descriptive and quantitative synthesis was conducted.
resultsForty studies were included on: gait-assisting exoskeletons (GAEs), orthopaedic footwear (OF), knee and/or ankle-foot-orthoses (AFOs) and non-invasive neuroprostheses that provide functional electrical stimulation (FES). Pairwise meta-analysis could not be performed due to a lack of homogenous data. The within-group pre-post meta-analysis in GAE studies showed an improvement in 2-min walk test (2MWT) (m) (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.36, 95%-CI: 0.17 to 0.54), but not in 10-meter walk test (10MWT) (sec) (SMD = 0.33, 95%-CI: -0.10 to 0.76) and in functional independence measure (FIM) (SMD = -0.002, 95%-CI: -0.21 to 0.21). In AFO studies, there was no improvement in 10MWT(m) (SMD = -0.11, 95%-CI: -0.76 to 0.53). A single session with AFO or OF vs no-AFO or OF post-intervention meta-analysis did not reveal an improvement in walking speed (m/s) (SMD = 0.39, 95%-CI: -0.03 to 0.83). DISCUSSION: GAEs seem to help patients to walk longer. The meta-analyses showed no significant results to support the effect of AFOs or OF. Neuroprostheses and knee orthoses showed no evidence.
conclusionNo clear conclusions can be drawn on how AGDs affect NMDs. The positive AGD effects are based on very low certainty of evidence.
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.