Comparison 2.

Perceptual interventions: direct comparisons

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Activity up to 6 months of follow‐up	0	0	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
1.1 Functional training versus sensory stimulation	0	0	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
2 Activity at scheduled end of intervention	1	80	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.31 [‐0.13, 0.75]
2.1 Functional training versus sensory stimulation	1	80	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.31 [‐0.13, 0.75]
3 Perceptual impairment up to 6 months of follow‐up	0	0	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
3.1 Functional training versus sensory stimulation	0	0	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
4 Perceptual impairment at scheduled end of intervention	1	80	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.02 [‐0.42, 0.45]
4.1 Functional training versus sensory stimulation	1	80	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.02 [‐0.42, 0.45]
5 Quality of life up to 6 months of follow‐up	0	0	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
5.1 Functional training versus sensory stimulation	0	0	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
6 Effects on carer up to 6 months of follow‐up	0	0	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
6.1 Functional training versus sensory stimulation	0	0	Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
7 Discharged to institutional care	0	0	Peto Odds Ratio (Peto, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
7.1 Functional training versus sensory stimulation	0	0	Peto Odds Ratio (Peto, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
8 Falls or accidents	0	0	Peto Odds Ratio (Peto, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
8.1 Functional training versus sensory stimulation	0	0	Peto Odds Ratio (Peto, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]