SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2025
Effects of different exercise interventions on motor function in patients at different post-stroke recovery phases: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Post-stroke motor dysfunction is common, with diverse intervention strategies; however, their efficacy across recovery phases remains unclear. Objective: To systematically review and compare the effects of different exercise interventions on motor function in patients at different post-stroke recovery phases. Methods: Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to October 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with stroke assessing exercise effects on motor function were included. A Bayesian Network Meta-analysis (NMA) was applied for measures with enough studies and comparisons. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool. Results: A total of 35 RCTs involving 1,540 stroke patients. In the acute phase, aerobic exercise (AE) was potentially superior to conventional therapy (CT) in improving 6-min walk distance (6MWD), Barthel Index (BI), and Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA). In the subacute phase, AE also showed a certain advantage in enhancing 6MWD. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), core stability exercise combined with resistance exercise (CSE + RE, 99.99%) ranked best for improving the 10-meter walk test (10MWT); CSE (80.84%) was most effective for BI; and AE (78.73%) was optimal for improving FMA. In the chronic phase, AE + RE ranked first for improving 6MWD (83.33%) and FMA (99.90%); CSE (98.62%) was the most effective for 10MWT; and AE (87.85%) remained the best intervention for enhancing BI. Conclusion: Exercise interventions exert phase-specific effects on motor recovery post-stroke. These findings underscore the importance of tailored, phase-specific rehabilitation programs. Long-term efficacy and individualized optimization require further investigation. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42024607395.
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.