Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42638125›Full record

SynthesisJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026

Brain-computer interface for upper limb functional recovery post-stroke: a meta-analysis of improvement in upper limb motor function and changes in neurophysiological markers.

Huanhuan Zhang, Runzhi Xian, Yuchi Zhang, Xiaoyu Liu, Guoqiang Yang, Guiquan Chen

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Huanhuan ZhangSchool of Physical Education, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan, China.
Runzhi XianSchool of Physical Education, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan, China.
Yuchi ZhangSchool of Physical Education, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan, China.
Xiaoyu LiuSchool of Health and Rehabilitation, Zigong Vocational and Technical College, Zigong, Sichuan, China.
Guoqiang YangAcupuncture and Rehabilitation Department, The Affiliated Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan, China.
Guiquan ChenSchool of Physical Education, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan, China. chenguiquan1973@126.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBrain-Computer Interface (BCI) has emerged as a promising intervention, facilitating recovery of upper limb motor function, enhancing associated neurophysiological markers, and improving activities of daily living (ADL) performance, which is measured using the Modified Barthel Index (MBI). Nevertheless, most existing research has centered on individual outcome domains, and thus critical questions remain unanswered. These questions include heterogeneity in treatment efficacy across different post-stroke phases, in addition to the consistency of BCI's effects across specific functional assessment scales, such as the Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity Scale (FMA-UE) and the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT)-and on neurophysiological markers.

objectiveTo perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of BCI-mediated rehabilitation versus conventional rehabilitation on upper limb motor function, functional activities, neurophysiological markers, and MBI performance in patients with stroke.

methodsSystematic searches were performed in 7 databases for this study: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wan Fang Data, and China Biology Medicine Database (CBM). Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing BCI-mediated rehabilitation with conventional rehabilitation in patients with upper limb dysfunction following stroke. The primary outcome measure was FMA-UE scores. Secondary outcome measures included functional activity levels as assessed by ARAT, neurophysiological markers (e.g., motor evoked potentials, MEPs, electroencephalography, EEG indices), and MBI scores. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the validated evidence-based Cochrane Collaboration's RoB 2.0. In the meta-analysis, if the results of the heterogeneity test were less than 25%, the fixed-effect model was employed; otherwise, the random-effects model was used. For each outcome measure, the mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD), together with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), were calculated.

resultsAfter screening against the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 16 eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were ultimately included, encompassing a total of 1761 patients. Compared with conventional rehabilitation interventions, BCI rehabilitation interventions exert a certain effect on improving patients 'upper limb motor function (SMD = 0.49, 95%CI;0.26-0.73, p = 0.037).Additionally, significant improvements were observed in ARAT scores (SMD = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.14-0.91, p = 0.035),neurophysiological markers(SMD = 0.53, 95% CI;0.08-0.98, p < 0.05)and MBI scores(SMD = 0.85, 95% CI;0.55-1.14, p < 0.001).Subgroup analyses of BCI-mediated rehabilitation interventions for upper limb motor function recovery in stroke patients demonstrated certain subgroup-specific disparities in the magnitude of therapeutic effects across different subgroups. With respect to stroke staging, BCI-mediated rehabilitation interventions conferred superior efficacy for motor function recovery in patients with subacute stroke, a finding plausibly attributable to the temporal course of post-stroke neural remodeling. Subgroup analyses stratified by intervention dosage demonstrated that both 10-15 and 20-30 sessions of BCI-mediated rehabilitation interventions resulted in clinically meaningful improvements in patients' upper limb function. No statistically significant difference was detected between these two treatment regimens, yet the 20-30-session protocol was associated with a relatively larger effect size. Furthermore, subgroup analyses stratified by intervention modality demonstrated that no statistically significant differences emerged across the distinct intervention approaches, and this observation plausibly suggests the rehabilitative benefits of divergent BCI paradigms in patients are uniformly mediated through neural circuit remodeling.

conclusionBCI emerges as a promising therapeutic modality for stroke rehabilitation, delivering substantial, statistically significant improvements across multiple key outcomes, including FMA-UE, ARAT, neurophysiological markers, and MBI scores with consistent statistical significance observed across all aforementioned domains.

Indexed as

Brain-Computer InterfacesRecovery of FunctionStroke RehabilitationUpper ExtremityHumansStrokeBCIMBIMeta-analysisNeurophysiological markersStrokeUpper limb recovery

Identifiers

PMID42638125
PMCPMC13501825

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.