ReviewGeriatrics (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Differential Effects of Cognitive vs. Motor Dual-Task Training in Stroke Rehabilitation: A Precision-Focused Meta-Analysis.
Review in Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland), 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesStroke predominantly affects older adults and is accompanied by age-related declines in balance and mobility. Given the inter-individual variability in post-stroke functional capacity, identifying the most effective dual-task training modalities for specific patient profiles is essential for precision-based stroke rehabilitation. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the differential effectiveness of motor dual-task training (MDT) and cognitive dual-task training (CDT) on gait performance, balance control, and motor function while exploring other moderating factors.
methodsThe study followed the PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search of six English databases (Web of Science, PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL) and one Chinese database (CNKI) was conducted from November 2023 to June 2025. Randomized controlled trials involving adult stroke survivors were included. Outcomes included gait, balance, and lower-extremity motor function. Random-effects meta-analysis, subgroup analyses, and meta-regression were performed to evaluate modality-specific effects and moderating factors.
resultsTwenty-one RCTs (
conclusionsThese findings provide guidance for tailoring dual-task modality and timing to individual patient profiles, though high heterogeneity and the lack of direct comparisons between MDT and CDT limit definitive conclusions.
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.