MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408290034 · doi:10.1080/10749357.2025.2469473

Effectiveness of technology-based stroke interventions to improve upper limb functioning in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4408290034 on OpenAlexaff
Meiling Carbajal-Galarza, Nathaly Olga Chinchihualpa Paredes, Sergio Alejandro Abanto-Perez, Gustavo Saposnik, María Lazo‐Porras

Bibliographic record

VenueTopics in Stroke Rehabilitation · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersFondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico, Tecnológico y de Innovación Tecnológica
KeywordsMeta-analysisStroke (engine)Psychological interventionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationLow and middle income countriesPhysical therapyPsychologyMedicineDeveloping countryEconomicsPsychiatryEconomic growthEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Stroke is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide, with low- and middle- income countries (LMICs) representing 69% of stroke incidence. Technology-based interventions offer potential for improving motor function and rehabilitation adherence; however, their impact in LMICs remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: To measure the efficacy of technological interventions compared to conventional physical rehabilitation in improving post- stroke upper limb motor function in LMICs. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review (PROSPERO registration: CRD42020213333) of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) from PubMed, Global Index Medicus, and Physiotherapy Evidence Databases. Studies included stroke survivors receiving technological interventions for upper limb rehabilitation. Effectiveness outcomes included upper limb motor function, performance for activities of daily living, and quality of life. A meta-analysis was performed using mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for RCTs. RESULTS: Fifty studies were included after the screening phase, comprising a total of 2646 participants. Nine technological interventions were evaluated, including: virtual reality (40%), robotics (22%), telerehabilitation (10%), among others. Meta-analysis showed significant effect of immersive virtual reality on upper limb function using the Fugl-Meyer Scale (MD 5.65; 95% CI 4.88 to 6.43) and on daily activity performance using the Functional Independence Measure (MD 4,82; 95% CI 2,45-7,19). A significant difference was also found between telerehabilitation and conventional therapy using the modified Barthel index (MD of 3.28; 95% CI 0.86 to 5.70). CONCLUSIONS: Immersive virtual reality and telerehabilitation are effective interventions compared to conventional rehabilitation in LMICs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0250.042
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTopics in Stroke RehabilitationSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207