Skip to main content
. 2025 Aug 22;6:1448174. doi: 10.3389/fresc.2025.1448174

Table 1.

Summary statistics of the studies computed in our data analysis, including sample size, average Fugl-Meyer assessment of upper extremity (FM) at baseline and post-standard rehabilitation care, serial change in FM between baseline and post, and effect size in terms of standardized mean difference and standard error.

Study ID Study name Sample size Baseline Post Δ FM Effect size
Avg FM Avg FM SMD SE
14 Page et al. (2004) (21) 6 32.55 29.7 2.85 0.29 0.91
17 Pang et al. (2006) (22) 30 51.3 52.5 1.2 0.06 0.43
2 Page et al. (2007) (2) 16 35.75 36.75 1 0.1 0.53
7 Stinear et al. (2008) (7) 16 17.6 19.6 2 0.12 0.61
13 Chae (2009) (23) 13 32.3 33.8 1.5 0.13 0.62
20 Housman et al. (2009) (24) 14 18.1 20.3 2.2 0.55 2.10
16 Lin et al. (2009) (25) 20 49.75 51.25 1.5 0.12 0.63
11 Lindenberg et al. (2010) (26) 10 39.8 41 1.2 0.10 0.55
12 Lo et al. (2010) (27) 27 20.3 19.24 1.06 0.11 0.64
8 Michielsen et al. (2011) (13) 20 36.4 36.6 0.2 0.01 0.32
15 Line et al. (2010) (33) 17 53.53 54.99 1.46 0.16 0.76
10 Liao et al. (2012) (20) 10 39.6 40.9 1.3 0.11 0.56
19 Reinkensmeyer et al. (2012) (28) 13 22.9 23 0.1 0.01 0.40
3 Klamroth et al. (2014) (3) 35 20.7 23.3 2.6 0.32 1.89
18 Timmermans et al. (2014) (19) 11 53 54 1 0.14 0.64
4 Fleming et al. (2015) (4) 17 37.5 38.1 0.6 0.02 0.36
5 Cacho et al. (2015) (5) 10 34.9 38.3 3.4 0.18 0.73
9 Colomer et al. (2016) (32) 16 9 9.5 0.5 0.16 0.72
1 Levy et al. (2016) (1) 56 37.6 40.7 3.1 0.45 3.39
6 Chen et al. (2019) (6) 11 30.03 27.06 2.97 0.14 0.63
Total (all studies, N= 20) 368 33.6 ± 12.7 34.5 ± 12.9 0.9 ± 1.66 0.11 0.87