ReviewFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2026
Augmented feedback as a therapeutic approach for gait rehabilitation in patients with cerebral palsy: a systematic review.
Review in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of augmented feedback (AF) in improving gait function in individuals with cerebral palsy (CP) and assess the strength of evidence across different gait parameters. Eligibility criteria: We included peer-reviewed interventional studies involving children or adults with CP who received AF during gait training, with gait-related outcomes assessed. Information sources: A systematic search was conducted in July 2025 across PubMed, Cochrane Library, IEEE Xplore, and PEDro database. Risk of bias: Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs and MINORS criteria for other study designs. Included studies: Of 477 screened records, 25 studies met inclusion criteria, comprising 612 total participants (409 intervention, 203 control). Studies included 13 single-session and 12 multi-session interventions. Synthesis of results: Using systematic evidence synthesis, velocity improvements showed strong evidencial support for AF, while ankle kinematics demonstrated moderate to strong evidence. Visual feedback had the most consistent effects across parameters, particularly for kinematic outcomes. Most other gait parameters (step length, stride length, cadence) showed inconclusive evidence due to conflicting findings across studies of varying quality. Limitations of evidence: High heterogeneity in protocols, outcome measures, and study quality (32% high, 52% moderate, 16% low quality) prevented a meta-analysis. Limited long-term follow-up data (only 5 studies) restricts conclusions about sustained effects. Interpretation: AF shows promise for enhancing gait velocity and ankle function in CP, particularly for spastic subtypes. However, evidence remains insufficient for widespread clinical adoption. Standardized protocols, larger sample sizes, and long-term follow-ups are essential for evidence-based implementation.
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.