SynthesisFrontiers in sports and active living2026
The impact of virtual reality exercise on motor function, balance and gait function, and cognitive function in stroke patients: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Synthesis in Frontiers in sports and active living, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Stroke is a leading cause of adult disability, and most survivors experience motor, balance and gait, and cognitive impairment. Virtual reality exercise is an innovative rehabilitation approach, but fragmented evidence limits its clinical application. This umbrella review synthesized meta-analytic evidence to evaluate VR exercise effects on motor, balance/gait, and cognitive function in stroke patients. Methods: This PROSPERO-registered review CRD420261341936 followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials evaluating VR exercise in stroke rehabilitation were identified from six electronic databases. Methodological quality was assessed with AMSTAR 2, and evidence certainty classified via metaumbrella GRADE-based criteria, with quantitative evidence re-analyzed using deduplicated primary RCTs. Results: Ten meta-analyses with 367 pre-deduplication RCT entries and 14,352 total participants were included. After deduplication and exclusion of trials with unavailable or incomplete numerical data, 138, 81, and 23 unique RCTs contributed to the motor, balance/gait, and cognitive analyses, respectively. VR exercise was associated with statistically significant improvements in several functional outcomes; however, the magnitude and certainty of effects varied across domains. VR was associated with significant improvements in functional ambulation (equivalent standardized mean difference, eSMD = 0.70, 95% CI 0.23-1.17) and upper limb motor function (eSMD = 0.38, 95% CI 0.21-0.55); gait velocity (eSMD = 0.63, 95% CI 0.43-0.82) and Berg Balance Scale scores (eSMD = 0.69, 95% CI 0.45-0.92); and global cognition measured by Montreal Cognitive Assessment (eSMD = 0.48, 95% CI 0.19-0.76). Most outcomes had very low certainty (MoCA: moderate). Heterogeneity varied considerably across outcome measures ( Conclusions: VR exercise may be associated with improvements in selected post-stroke motor, balance and gait, and cognitive outcomes. However, statistically significant effects should not be interpreted as clinically meaningful benefits without established MCID thresholds or interpretable benchmarks. Evidence is further limited by substantial heterogeneity, poor review methodology, and generally low certainty. VR may therefore be a potential adjunctive rehabilitation approach, but current evidence does not support replacing conventional rehabilitation or preferential use in specific patient subgroups. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261341936, PROSPERO CRD420261341936.
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.