SynthesisActa neurologica Belgica2025
Application of virtual reality (VR) in the rehabilitation of neurological disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment parameters.
Synthesis in Acta neurologica Belgica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Effectiveness of Virtual Reality-Based Interventions in Patients with Ataxic Conditions: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe present study evaluates the impact of virtual reality (VR) technology on balance function in patients with different neurological disorders, and explores the effects of diverse VR parameters on treatment efficacy.
methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus databases was conducted up to December 15, 2024. Data from 44 studies Involving 2,019 patients were independently screened and extracted by two researchers. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool, and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1 software. The quality of evidence was evaluated using GRADE.
resultsVR significantly improved balance ability in patients with different neurological disorders (SMD = 0.75; 95% CI: 0.62-0.87; Z = 11.96; p < 0.001), with the most pronounced effect in Parkinson's disease (SMD = 0.95; 95% CI: 0.67-1.22; Z = 6.75; p < 0.001). Significant improvements were also noted in static balance (SMD = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.42-1.04; Z = 4.59; p < 0.001), Berg Balance Scale (SMD = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.61-0.90; Z = 10.25; p < 0.001), Timed Up and Go (SMD = - 0.30; 95% CI: - 0.50 to - 0.09; Z = 2.87; p = 0.004), and Tinetti Scale (SMD = 0.53; 95% CI: 0.18-0.88; Z = 2.94; p = 0.003). However, improvements in the Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale (SMD = 0.29; 95% CI: - 0.04-0.61; Z = 1.72; p = 0.09) and Functional Reach Test scores (SMD = 0.17; 95% CI: - 0.30-0.63; Z = 0.70; p = 0.49) were not significant. Combining VR with other therapies yielded better results (SMD = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.63-0.93; Z = 10.29; p < 0.001). Treatments lasting no more than 30 min (SMD = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.63-0.94; Z = 9.73; p < 0.001) and Intervention periods not exceeding 6 weeks (SMD = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.61-0.95; Z = 9.02; p < 0.001) were more effective.
conclusionVR technology effectively improves balance In patients with neurological disorders. Optimal results are achieved with sessions under 30 min and intervention periods less than six weeks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40965787What 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.