ReviewFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2026
Machine learning-based adaptive personalization in virtual reality stroke rehabilitation: 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Stroke is the second leading cause of disability worldwide. Recently, VR has been seen as a new therapeutic tool. Many existing VR systems rely on rule-based difficulty adjustment that may not adequately capture the non-linear dynamics of stroke recovery. Machine learning algorithms can provide adaptive personalization in virtual reality stroke rehabilitation. Objective: The aim is to systematically review available evidence on ML-based adaptive personalization mechanisms in VR stroke rehabilitation, focusing on algorithms and adaptation strategies, clinical outcomes and implementation considerations. Methods: In accordance with the PRISMA 2020 statement six databases were searched (January 2015-December 2025). Included studies conducted with the use of ML algorithms for VR. The ML algorithms, adaptation mechanisms, therapeutic parameters, clinical outcomes, and implementation factors are covered in data extraction. Risk of bias was assessed with validated tools; meta-analysis was performed when appropriate. Results: In total, twenty-five studies were included for analysis. Reinforcement learning ( Conclusion: ML-based adaptive VR rehabilitation demonstrates clinical efficacy and safety for stroke recovery, though implementation barriers in resource-limited settings require attention. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261298450, PROSPERO CRD420261298450.
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.