ReviewInternational journal of nursing studies advances2026
Effectiveness of virtual reality-based rehabilitation on quality of life and upper extremity functions among stroke survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in International journal of nursing studies advances, 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 rehabilitation faces challenges such as limited accessibility and engagement, prompting interest in virtual reality-based interventions. While virtual reality shows promise, its effectiveness in improving quality of life (QoL) and upper extremity (UE) functions in stroke survivors remains unclear. Objectives: To evaluate (1) the effectiveness of virtual reality-based interventions in QoL and UE functions among stroke survivors and (2) the feasibility and safety indicators across trials. Data sources: A comprehensive search was conducted across six electronic databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Scopus, PsycINFO, and CINAHL to identify relevant articles published between Jan 2014 and December 2024. The search was updated on 9 May 2026. Review methods: The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were employed to ensure methodological rigor and standardized reporting. Two independent reviewers assessed the eligibility of the articles, and the quality of the studies were appraised using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Randomized Trials (RoB2). Feasibility indicators (participation, adherence, attrition) and adverse events were also extracted. Results: Thirty-four randomized controlled trials involving 1834 participants were included. Two studies had a low risk of bias, 19 had some concerns, and 13 had a high risk. Meta-analyses revealed non-significant effects of virtual reality-based interventions on QoL (SMD = -0.09, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.11, Conclusion: Current evidence does not demonstrate the superiority of virtual reality-based interventions over conventional rehabilitation for improving QoL or UE functions in stroke survivors, despite generally favorable feasibility and safety profiles. The low-to-very low certainty of evidence highlights the need for stronger methodological rigor, theoretical frameworks, and long-term follow-up. Virtual reality may serve as a complementary option when access to traditional rehabilitation is limited. Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42024619427).
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.