Review Article

Effectiveness of Robotics in Stroke Rehabilitation to Accelerate Upper Extremity Function: Systematic Review

Table 3

Risk of bias.

CitationRandom sequence generationAllocation concealmentBaseline differences b/w intervention groupsBlinding of participantsBlinding of study personnelBlinding of outcome assessment—self-reportedBlinding of outcome assessment—objectiveIncomplete outcome dataSelective reportingOverall risk of bias

Aprile et al. [26]++++Moderate
Carpinella et al. [27]+++++Moderate
Hsu et al. [28]++++++Low
Hesse et al. [29]++++++Moderate
Jiang et al. [30]+++(n/a)+++Low
Klamroth-Marganska et al. [31]+++(n/a)++Low
Lee et al. [32]++++Moderate
Lee et al. [33]+++++Low
McCabe et al. [34]+++(n/a)+++Low
Orihuela-Espina et al. [35]++(n/a)+++Low
Rodgers et al. [39]+++(n/a)++Low
Sale et al. [36]++++++Low
Straudi et al. [37]++++(n/a)++Low
Takahashi et al. [38]+++++++Low

Note. Key: yes (+), no (–), not sure (?), not applicable (n/a). Scoring for overall risk-of-bias assessment is as follows: 0–3 minuses, low risk of bias (L); 4–6 minuses, moderate risk of bias (M); 7–9 minuses, high risk of bias (H).