Skip to main content
. 2014 Jan 23;2014(1):CD002840. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002840.pub3
Study Reason for exclusion
Aschbacher 2006 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Bayat 2005 Described only a single‐session application of treadmill training
Bleckert 2006 Both groups received treadmill training and differed only in the speed of the treadmill
Blennerhassett 2004 Irrelevant intervention: circuit class training
Borsje 2003 Correspondence with the author revealed that the trial was abandoned
Brissot 2006 Investigated electromechanically assisted gait training
Caldwell 2000 Correspondence with the author revealed that the trial was abandoned after the recruitment of only 5 participants (each allocated to 1 of 3 treatment groups)
Daly 2004 Both groups received treadmill training; the parameter that was experimentally manipulated was electrical stimulation
Daly 2011 Both groups received treadmill training and differed only by means of functional electrical stimulation
Dean 2000 Irrelevant intervention: circuit class training
DEGAS 2007 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Dias 2007 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
English 2007 Irrelevant intervention: circuit class training
Fisher 2008 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Forrester 2004 Evaluated a single treatment session, not a full course of treatment
Freivogel 2009 Mixed population of patients with traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injury and stroke; only 2 out of 16 included patient had a stroke
Globokar 2005 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Hidler 2009 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Hornby 2008 Irrelevant intervention: robotic device training
Husemann 2007 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Jang 2005 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Jeong 2008 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Khanna 2003 Correspondence with the author revealed that the trial was abandoned before the commencement of recruitment
Kim 2001 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Kim 2008 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Kovrazhkina 2009 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Kwakkel 1999 Correspondence with the author revealed that less than 20% of participants in the EXP group participated in treadmill training (i.e. only 6 out of 31 participants)
Langhammer 2000 Correspondence with the author revealed that treadmill training (with or without body weight support) was not used in either group
Langhammer 2007 Less than 20% of participants in the EXP group received treadmill training
Lau 2010 Both groups received treadmill training which differed only by speed
Lindquist 2011 Quasi‐experimental study, without randomisation
Macko 2006 Both groups received treadmill training which differed only by duration and speed
Mayr 2007 EXP group used an electromechanical device on a treadmill
Mayr 2008 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
McCain 2008 Not a RCT
Nielsen 2007 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Pang 2010 Not a RCT
Park 2012 Both groups received treadmill training and differed only in the setting (underwater treadmill versus overground treadmill)
Peurala 2005 Did not use treadmill training
Peurala 2009 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Ploughman 2008 Evaluation of a single treatment session
Rimmer 2000 Correspondence with the author revealed that only one‐third of participants in the EXP group participated in treadmill training
Salbach 2004 Irrelevant intervention: circuit class training
Saltuari 2004 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Schwartz 2009 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Shafshak 2012 All groups received treadmill training with partial body weight support: the parameter that was experimentally manipulated was upper limb swinging
Sullivan 2002 All groups received treadmill training with partial body weight support; the parameter that was experimentally manipulated was treadmill speed
Tong 2006 Irrelevant intervention: electromechanical device training
Trueblood 2001 A non‐random process was used to allocate participants to groups in Part II and Part III
Participants chose which treatment they would receive
Tsai 2004 All groups received treadmill training (without partial body weight support); the parameters that were experimentally manipulated were walking direction and treadmill slope
Tsang 2012 Irrelevant outcome: echocardiography
Werner 2002b Both groups received treadmill training with body weight support; the parameter that was experimentally manipulated was 'conventional' physiotherapy gait training
Westlake 2009 Used robot‐assisted training (Lokomat)
Yagura 2006 Both groups received treadmill training with body weight support; the parameter that was experimentally manipulated was therapeutic facilitation
Yang 2008 Both groups received treadmill training and differed only by the EXP group receiving virtual reality as well

EXP: experimental RCT: randomised controlled trial