SynthesisBrain and behavior2025
Efficacy of Action Observation Therapy on Cognitive Function in Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Brain and behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- EEG Biomarkers During Upper-Limb Action Observation Therapy for Stroke Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Review
- Effect of Tai Chi combined with visual-action-sensory rehabilitation therapies on cognitive function in acute ischemic stroke: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Annals of medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAction Observation Therapy (AOT) is a rehabilitation method believed to activate the mirror neuron system, which may contribute to cognitive recovery. Previous studies have shown varying results due to different intervention characteristics. This review will examine the efficacy of AOT on clinical cognitive function in stroke.
methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing AOT with non-AOT interventions in cognitive function were included. Databases searched included PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, CNKI, WanFang, and VIP database from inception to May 6, 2024. The risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's Risk of Bias Assessment Tool 2.0, and the quality of evidence was evaluated with the GRADE approach. RevMan 5.4 and Stata 18.0 were used for the meta-analysis. After the analysis of cognitive function, meta-regression was performed to explore the possible sources of heterogeneity. A random-effects meta-analysis model using the inverse-variance and Hartung-Knapp methods was used to calculate pooled estimates and 95% confidence interval (CI) values. We examined the funnel plot and used Egger's regression test to assess for publication bias. This study was conducted by PRISMA reporting guidelines (Appendix S1). The search protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024571694).
resultsA total of 6 RCTs with 400 participants were included. All the included articles were rated as having B-level quality. Meta-analysis showed that AOT significantly improved cognitive function in stroke. Meta-regression did not find the source of heterogeneity. The GRADE result indicated that the finding was of very low certainty.
conclusionsCognitive interventions based on AOT can improve cognitive function in stroke patients. However, it should be interpreted cautiously due to heterogeneity and low certainty. To strengthen evidence-based practices, we advocate for higher-quality and more homogeneous RCTs, including strict randomization procedures, large sample sizes, extended follow-up periods, and studies focused on specific disease subtypes.
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.