Electromechanical‐ and robotic‐assisted gait training plus physiotherapy vs usual care or physiotherapy: Independent walking (primary outcome)
Electromechanical‐ and robotic‐assisted gait training plus… showed no clear difference in recovery of independent walking at compared with physiotherapy (or usual care) (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Electromechanical‐ and robotic‐assisted gait training plus physiotherapy vs physiotherapy (or usual care) Recovery of independent walking at · walking after stroke Electromechanical‐ and robotic‐assisted gait training plus… showed no clear difference in recovery of independent walking at compared with physiotherapy (or usual care) (moderate certainty). Electromechanical‐assisted training for walking after stroke (2017) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD006185.PUB4, superseded | OR 1.93 [0.72, 5.13] | 6 studies · 496 participants | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Electromechanical‐assisted training for walking after stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.