SynthesisJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
Effectiveness of mirror and robot-assisted therapy for upper extremity rehabilitation in post-stroke patients: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionStroke is a leading cause of death and disability, with survivors often facing upper extremity (UE) impairments. Mirror therapy (MT) can enhance motor function but is influenced by cognitive and emotional factors. Robot-assisted therapy (RT) has shown efficacy in restoring UE function. Robot-mirror therapy (RMT), which combines MT and RT, has been investigated in several trials, with some showing benefits while others reported limited effects. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate RMT's effectiveness in improving UE function in stroke patients.
methodsWe included RCTs involving RMT in adult stroke patients. Searches covered ten databases (Cochrane Library, Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CNKI, CINAHL, PEDro, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP) through October 2025, with a grey literature search. Two independent reviewers conducted study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using the Cochrane collaboration's tool and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) guideline, respectively.
resultsSixteen RCTs (n=736) were analyzed. RMT significantly improved UE motor function (Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity (FMA-UE); MD 7.52, 95% CI 4.16-10.87; P<.0001 and Wolf Motor Function Test; MD 5.13, 95% CI 2.33-7.92; P=.0003), distal UE motor function (FMA-UE (distal); MD 2.92, 95% CI 1.43-4.42; P=.0001), hand motor function (SMD 1.06, 95% CI 0.15-1.97; P=.02), hand muscle strength (grip strength; SMD 1.34, 95% CI 0.17-2.51; P=.02), activities of daily living (Modified Barthel Index; MD 7.80, 95% CI 4.15-11.45; P<.0001 and Functional Independence Measure; MD 4.73, 95% CI 0.30-9.15; P=.04), and quality of life (SMD 1.00, 95% CI 0.00-1.99; P=.05). Subgroup analysis showed better outcomes in older patients (≥55), shorter interventions (<18 hours), and trial length of 3-6 weeks.
conclusionModerate-quality evidence supports the effectiveness of RMT-based interventions for improving UE motor function and activities of daily living in stroke patients. Trial Registration PROSPERO CRD420251077740.
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.