Trial reportBMC psychology2025
Randomised control trial of virtual reality in cognitive rehabilitation: effectiveness and near-transfer effect for stroke patients.
Trial report in BMC psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with computerized cognitive training improves global cognition and functional independence post-stroke: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to determine whether cognitive training based on an egocentric perspective leads to greater improvements in target functions compared to training using an allocentric perspective or conventional rehabilitation. Additionally, it seeks to examine whether egocentric perspective-based training enhances the near transfer effect, resulting in improved other cognitive functions compared to allocentric perspective-based training and conventional rehabilitation.
methods132 stroke patients (65.9% males) aged 31 to 83 (mean age 62.54 ± 10.62) undergoing inpatient rehabilitation were randomly assigned to one of the three groups: allocentric (N = 40) or egocentric perspective-based (N = 46) selective visual attention and short-term visual memory training and control (conventional rehabilitation) group (N = 46). Evaluations were performed before (at the beginning of rehabilitation for control group) and after the intervention (two weeks after pre-test for control group). The target functions included the changes in short-term visual memory, visual-spatial attention, attention-orientation, while near transfer effect included the changes in visuo-construction abilities, task switching, verbal memory, verbal fluency, language, visuo-spatial abilities, general cognitive function. To investigate how different perspectives affect selective visual attention and short-term visual memory training and near-transfer effect over time, while accounting for baseline cognitive scores, were conducted mixed repeated measures ANOVA and ANCOVA (controlled for age, years of education, lesion location, and days since stroke). A priori power analysis and effect sizes using Cohen's d
resultsThe results showed that cognitive rehabilitation tasks based on egocentric perspective in combination to conventional rehabilitation are effective in improving attention-orientation and cause near transfer effect on spatial abilities and general cognitive functioning. While tasks based on allocentric perspective in combination to conventional rehabilitation are effective in improving short-term visual memory and cause near transfer effect on spatial abilities.
conclusionsThe cognitive improvements and near-transfer effects observed in our results indicate that combining conventional rehabilitation with tasks based on egocentric and allocentric perspectives integrated in virtual reality environments can enhance rehabilitation effectiveness. However, further studies are required to confirm the generalizability of these findings.
trial registrationThe present study, along with its protocol, was retrospectively registered in the ISRCTN clinical trial registry on January 3, 2024 ( https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN14922230 ).
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.