Blennerhassett 2004.

Methods	RCT Mobility CCT versus upper limb CCT
Participants	30 participants (15 each group) receiving inpatient rehabilitation (mean of 43 days post‐stroke), mean age 55.1 years, able to walk 10 m with close supervision with or without gait aids
Interventions	Intervention: mobility‐related CCT, 10 5‐minute workstations consisting of functional tasks including sit to stand, step ups, obstacle course walking, standing balance, stretching and strengthening exercises); 1 h/day, 5 days/week for 4 weeks Comparison: upper limb‐related CCT, 10 5‐minute workstations consisting of functional tasks to improve reach to grasp, hand eye co‐ordination, stretching and strengthening exercises; 1 h/day, 5 days/week for 4 weeks Staff:participant ratio: 1:4 Both groups received additional CCT therapy in addition to usual care
Outcomes	6mWT, Step Test, TUG, LOS, MAS upper arm and hand items, JTHFT
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Card draw: unclear how cards were constructed
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Sealed, opaque envelopes, independent person
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Assessor blinded
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	100% data at 4 weeks
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No trial protocol
Other bias	Low risk	Adequate sample size