Hu 2003.
| Methods | RCT Randomisation by computer program |
|
| Participants | 86 inpatients with stroke Group 1: n = 44 Group 2: n = 42 |
|
| Interventions | Group 1: 45‐minute session/day, 5 days/week of cognitive rehabilitation including the use of cards, use or practical objects, self programmed computer software and transition to ADL (restorative) Group 2: medicine, occupational therapy and physiotherapy (restorative) |
|
| Outcomes | Neurobehavioural Cognitive Status Examination for general cognition but with executive function subcomponents, Barthel Index | |
| Notes | ||
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Allocation concealment not documented |
| Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Assessor was blinded |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | High risk | No data for the 8 participants who dropped out |
| Other bias | High risk | If the cognitive rehabilitation sessions were in addition to standard therapies, the extra intervention may have had the positive effect rather than the content per se |