ArticleFrontiers in neurology
Assessing efficacy and safety of dynamic scalp acupuncture for post-stroke rehabilitation: systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.
Article in Frontiers in neurology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Restoration of Neuronal Metabolism and Memory in Alzheimer's Disease by Reprogramming the Exosomal microRNA Network.Journal of molecular neuroscience : MN · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stroke is a leading cause of long-term disability worldwide highlighting the need for effective rehabilitation strategies to improve functional recovery. Dynamic Scalp Acupuncture (DSA), which combines scalp acupuncture with concurrent task-oriented training, has emerged as a potentially beneficial intervention for stroke rehabilitation. However, evidence regarding DSA has not been systematically synthesized as a distinct task-integrated rehabilitation approach. This protocol outlines a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DSA in stroke rehabilitation. This study will be conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. A comprehensive literature search will be performed in international databases, including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature; Chinese databases, including the China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Wanfang; and Korean databases, including the Research Information Sharing Service, Korean Studies Information Service System, and Korea Medical database. Eligible studies will be RCTs evaluating DSA either as a standalone intervention or as an adjunct to conventional rehabilitation in adults with stroke. The primary outcome will be motor function. Secondary outcomes will include activities of daily living and adverse events, while exploratory outcomes will include neurological impairment, balance, spasticity, health-related quality of life, and depression. Two reviewers will independently conduct study selection, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Where appropriate, meta-analyses will be performed using a random-effects model, and the certainty of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations. Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. This systematic review is expected to provide up-to-date evidence on the efficacy and safety of DSA for stroke rehabilitation. The findings may inform clinical practice and policy, and help guide future research. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251117520, Identifier CRD420251117520.
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.