The efficacy of gait rehabilitations for the treatment of incomplete spinal cord injury: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Table 3 Pairwise meta-analysis

Included studies	Comparisons	Pairwise meta-analysis USMD (95% CI)
Velocity (m/s)
4 studies [24, 26, 28, 39]	TM vs CPT	− 0.03 (− 0.14, 0.19)
6 studies [25, 29, 30, 33, 37, 38]	RAGT vs CPT	− 0.04 (− 0.04, 0.12)
Distance (m)
3 studies [26, 28, 31]	TM vs CPT	75.87 (− 85.22, 236.96)
5 studies [25, 29, 31, 33, 37]	RAGT vs CPT	65.34 (− 36.26,166.92)
WISCI
3 studies [32, 36, 39]	TM vs CPT	− 0.08 (− 0.93, 0.78)
5 studies [29, 33,34,35, 38]	RAGT vs CPT	3.28 (0.12, 6.45)

CPT, conventional physical therapy, FES, functional electrical stimulation, TM, treadmill, RAGT, robotic-assisted gait training, WISCI, Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury, USMD, unstandardized mean difference, CI, confidence interval

ISSN: 1749-799X