Trial reportBMC neurology2025
Enhanced neuroplasticity and gait recovery in stroke patients: a comparative analysis of active and passive robotic training modes.
Trial report in BMC neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparative efficacy of brain-computer interface-coupled robotic rehabilitation, robot-assisted therapy, and motor imagery for upper-limb motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Pooled it
- Post-stroke lower limb rehabilitation: a comparative study between exoskeleton robots and traditional gait training.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Pooled it
- Robot-assisted rehabilitation for post-stroke balance and postural control: an umbrella review and evidence map of systematic reviews.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Effectiveness of a Structured Robot-Assisted Ankle-Foot Sensorimotor Training Program Versus Manual Training in Chronic Stroke: Protocol for an Assessor-Blinded, Parallel-Group Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Comparative Efficacy of Exercise Modalities for Motor Function Recovery After Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The combined effect of task-oriented treadmill and high-intensity interval training on balance, gait parameters, and ADL in patients with chronic stroke: A randomized controlled trial with short-term follow-up.Journal of exercise science and fitness · 2026Article
- Deep Learning Models Optimization for Gait Phase Identification from EMG Data During Exoskeleton-Assisted Walking.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStroke is a leading cause of long-term disability, with lower limb dysfunction being a common sequela that significantly impacts patients' mobility and quality of life. Robotic-assisted training has emerged as a promising intervention for gait rehabilitation post-stroke. This study aims to compare the effects of active and passive lower limb robotic training on gait recovery in stroke patients.
methodsThis randomized controlled trial included 45 stroke patients who were divided into three groups: active mode group, passive mode group, and control group. All participants received standard rehabilitation therapy, while the intervention groups additionally received 20 min of robotic training (active or passive mode) daily for 10 sessions over two weeks. Outcome measures included the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) for motor function, motor evoked potentials (MEP) for neurophysiological assessment, and functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) for brain imaging.
resultsBoth active and passive groups showed significant improvements in FMA scores and MEP measures compared to pre-treatment baselines (P < 0.01). The active group exhibited significantly greater FMA score improvements (P = 0.02) and MEP amplitudes (P < 0.01) than the passive group. Additionally, fNIRS results indicated significantly enhanced brain activation in the affected motor cortex in the active group post-treatment (F = 5.82, P = 0.026), a change not observed in the passive group. These findings underscore the clinical superiority of active robotic training in enhancing motor recovery post-stroke.
conclusionActive mode robotic training is more effective than passive mode training in improving motor function and neurophysiological outcomes in stroke patients. These findings support the preferential use of active mode robotic training in clinical rehabilitation settings for enhancing gait recovery post-stroke. Further research with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods is warranted to confirm these results and explore long-term benefits.
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.