SynthesisFrontiers in human neuroscience2025
Systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness of robotic therapy in the recovery of motor functions after stroke.
Synthesis in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effects of Bilateral Robotic Arm Training in Stroke Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Effectiveness of mirror and robot-assisted therapy for upper extremity rehabilitation in post-stroke patients: a meta-analysis.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic Training and Neural Reorganization in Stroke: A Systematic Review.F1000Research · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of robotic hand-assisted rehabilitation on motor function and daily living activities in acute stroke: a randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Rehabilitation of patients in the subacute phase of stroke using the ReHand robotic system: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Trial
- Ankle Robotics Induces Ongoing Locomotor Plasticity with Delayed, Sustained Multi-Segmental Gait Improvements 17 Months After Training in Chronic Stroke.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- The Effectiveness of Personalized Robot-Assisted Rehabilitation on Fall Risk: A Retrospective Controlled Study with a 6-Month Follow-Up.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Robotic rehabilitation with the LokomatFrontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Article
- Comparative efficacy and mechanistic insights of non-invasive neuromodulation and motor rehabilitation on functional reorganization of the supplementary motor area in subacute stroke: a narrative review.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Review
- Early Rehabilitation Versus Conventional Approaches in Post-Traumatic Hand Injuries with Multiple Lesions: Clinical Outcomes and Future Directions.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Stroke is a leading cause of adult disability worldwide, often resulting in persistent motor impairments. While conventional rehabilitation approaches often yield modest results, robotic-assisted therapy has emerged as a promising solution to enhance motor recovery. However, the impact of stroke phase (acute, subacute, chronic) and other clinical modifiers on the effectiveness of robotic rehabilitation remains underexplored. Methods: The protocol for this systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO under the registration number CRD420251038754. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. The literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2.0. Primary outcomes included motor recovery, gait speed, and balance. A random-effects model (DerSimonian-Laird) was applied to calculate pooled standardized mean differences (SMD), and subgroup analyses and meta-regression were used to assess the influence of stroke phase, age, therapy duration, and combined interventions (e.g., virtual reality, mirror therapy). Results: Thirteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2015 and 2025 were included, with a total of 424 post-stroke patients. Robotic therapy showed a moderate but statistically significant effect over conventional rehabilitation (SMD = 0.59, 95% CI: [0.33; 0.84], Conclusion: Robotic-assisted therapy provides clinically meaningful improvements in post-stroke motor recovery. The findings support early stratification and personalization of rehabilitation programs based on stroke timing, age, and intervention intensity. Integration of robotic systems with virtual and cognitive components may further enhance neuroplasticity, leading to improved functional outcomes. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251038754.
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.