ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
Robot-assisted gait training on functional ambulation in patients with stroke: a retrospective real-world analysis across five robotic devices.
Article 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. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRobot-assisted gait training (RAGT) is increasingly used in stroke rehabilitation. However, its comparative effectiveness across device types remains unclear. This study explored the effectiveness of RAGT compared to conventional treatment using real-world clinical data.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 2,947 patients with stroke who received inpatient rehabilitation at a single center between 2015 and 2022. Patients were divided into RAGT and conventional treatment groups. Functional improvement was defined as a gain of ≥ 1 point in the Functional Ambulation Category. Multivariable logistic regression and classification and regression tree (CART) models were applied to identify predictors of favorable outcomes (effectors) and to explore clinical decision-making for device selection.
resultsThe RAGT group showed poorer baseline function but had a similar proportion of effectors (58.0%) compared to the control group (62.5%). Overall, RAGT was not associated with effector outcome versus control. Among RAGT devices, Morning Walk (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 3.25; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.79-5.87) and Exowalk (aOR = 4.42; 95% CI: 1.84-10.64) were significantly associated with higher odds of effector status compared to control, whereas Erigo was associated with lower odds (aOR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.35-0.96). CART models identified clinical features, such as the Berg Balance Scale, the Mini-Mental Status Examination, and the Fugl-Meyer Assessment, as key predictors of effector status and revealed patterns in robotic device allocation.
conclusionWhile RAGT was not superior to conventional treatment, certain devices were associated with improved gait function. These findings highlight the importance of tailoring robotic interventions.
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.