SynthesisFrontiers in neurology
Effects of non-invasive neural stimulation modalities on upper limb function in subacute stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Non-invasive neural stimulation (NINS) has been increasingly adopted as an adjunctive strategy in stroke rehabilitation. However, its effectiveness in improving upper limb function during the subacute stage remains uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of different NINS modalities on upper limb function and activities of daily living in patients with subacute stroke. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and major Chinese databases (CNKI, Wanfang, VIP) were systematically searched from inception to October 2025. Eligible studies included adult patients with subacute stroke (7 d-6 m) receiving NINS. The primary outcomes were upper limb function and activities of daily living. Outcome data were extracted at the end of the intervention for quantitative synthesis. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses prespecified in the study protocol were conducted based on recovery stage and stimulation modalities. Results: A total of 24 RCTs ( Conclusion: NINS may be associated with modest, context-dependent improvements in upper limb function and activities of daily living in patients with subacute stroke. However, given the substantial heterogeneity and methodological variability, current evidence remains limited and should be interpreted cautiously. Further large-scale, high-quality trials are required to clarify optimal stimulation modalities and clinical applicability. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, CRD420251242784.
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.