Goedert 2020.
| Study characteristics | ||
| Methods | RCT Setting: inpatient rehabilitation facility, USA | |
| Participants | Less than 60 days post stroke, first clinical stroke, unilateral right brain Event as confirmed by clinical computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging, and BIT score at screening indicative of neglect (< 129) Age, years: 65.6 control, 61.8 prism Sex: 5 men/4 women = control, 4/4 = prism Hemisphere damaged: right Time since stroke: 9 to 50 days post stroke | |
| Interventions | Prism adaptation. Those randomised to the prism group received prism adaptation treatment once a day for 10 days (5 days per week for 2 weeks). Prism adaptation sessions were timed and each lasted approximately 15 to 20 minutes. Control group received usual care | |
| Outcomes |
Outcomes were measured up to 24 weeks post intervention. For comparability with other studies, we used outcomes at week 6 post intervention |
|
| Notes | ||
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No information on process used despite detailed appendix |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Administrative (likely junior?) staff member tasked with list. Unblinded allocation and possibly post‐hoc evaluation “approximately half‐way through data collection” imply absence of proper quality control process |
| Blinding of participants | High risk | Not possible |
| Blinding of personnel | High risk | Not possible |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | High risk | Not attempted |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | High risk | Omission of 2 (11%) cases from prism arm, who did not (could not?) do more than 4 of planned 10 sessions |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | No evidence of this |
| Other bias | Unclear risk |
|