ArticlePLOS digital health2026
Trialling the efficacy of a technological visuo-cognitive training program as a compensatory tool for visual rehabilitation after stroke: A pilot study.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2026. 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.
- Interventions for Visual Field Loss After Acquired Brain Injury: A Systematic Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Visual impairments are common post-stroke and can lead to diminished functioning and difficulty accomplishing everyday tasks, such as reading and navigating unfamiliar environments independently. This pilot study investigates the usability, acceptability and preliminary efficacy of technological visuo-cognitive training (TVT) using the Senaptec Sensory Station for stroke survivors with visual field loss. Ten stroke survivors (8 males, 2 females; 43-79 years old; Mage = 65, SDage = 11.03) with a non-progressive visual field defect underwent TVT comprising baseline assessment, five 30-minute training sessions over 2-3 weeks, and post-intervention assessment. Measures of visual cognition, patient-reported outcomes, usability, and acceptability were assessed pre- and post-intervention, supplemented by qualitative interviews. Participants demonstrated meaningful gains in several aspects of visual search and functional vision. Reaction times on target capture tasks improved significantly, mirrored by more efficient performance on the Bell's Test. These behavioural changes aligned with reductions in reported visual difficulties and fatigue, both showing large effect sizes. Across sessions, participants also showed improvement in hand-eye coordination and visuomotor integration. Engagement with the system was high: perceived competence increased and usability ratings were excellent. Qualitative accounts contextualised these findings, describing enjoyment of the technology, occasional challenges related to adaptive difficulty or physical limitations, and perceived benefits such as greater awareness of visual scanning strategies in daily life. Notably, several sensory measures (e.g., visual clarity, contrast sensitivity, depth perception) remained unchanged, indicating that improvements were domain-specific rather than global. Overall, TVT demonstrated acceptability with selective improvements in visual search function and vision-related quality of life. Larger randomised controlled trials are needed to determine efficacy and comparative effectiveness against standard rehabilitation approaches.
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.