Trial reportJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
Development of virtual reality in the upper extremities function in children with Cerebral Palsy. A pilot randomized controlled trial.
Trial report 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the effect of the Virtual Reality (VR) in upper extremities function in children with Cerebral Palsy (CP). STUDY
designPilot randomization study.
methodsA total of 42 children with CP, aged 10 to15 years, were enrolled and randomly allocated into either an intervention group (n = 21) or a control group (n = 21) using a computer-generated block randomization sequence (block size of 4). There were no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. The intervention group received a VR training program, whereas the control group underwent conventional occupational therapy. Both interventions were administered in 45-minute sessions, three days per week, over five weeks. Pre- and post-intervention outcome measures included major upper extremity range of motion (ROM), the Box and Block Test (BBT), and the ABILHAND-Kids assessment.
resultsPost-intervention, both the VR and control groups demonstrated improvements across all measured outcomes, including upper-extremity ROM, BBT, and ABILHAND-Kids scores. Although no statistically significant between-group differences were observed in the overall cohort, a subgroup analysis revealed a statistically significant improvement in ABILHAND-Kids scores in favor of the VR intervention among children aged 10 to 12 years.
conclusionThese preliminary findings indicate that the VR intervention does not result in statistically significant improvements in upper-extremity ROM and motor function compared with conventional therapy.
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.