The publishers wish to apologise as the author corrections were not made on the above article:
Author affiliations of this article were incorrect. Correct author affiliations are as follows:
Kathryn S Hayward1,2, Ruth N Barker1 & Sandra G Brauer2
1Discipline of Physiotherapy, School of Public Health Tropical Medicine and Rehabilitation Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville 4811, Australia
2Division of Physiotherapy, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane 4072, Australia
Results of the search strategy were incorrect. The correct results are as follows:
The search strategy yielded 288 articles. After screening titles and abstracts 135 were excluded.
In-text references were incorrect for the strength of evidence rating for robotic therapy in the acute stage of recovery. The correct references are as follows:
On the basis of the best evidence synthesis, there is strong evidence that robotic therapy reduces impairments and increases activity of the proximal UL in stroke survivors with moderate to severe paresis in the acute stage of recovery [29,36,38,39].
Errors in Summary of RCTs tables
Effect size for MPS was incorrect for Rabadi et al [33] in Table IIIa. The correct effect size is 0.54.
Text is missing under ‘Intervention’ for Fasoli et al [39] in Table IIIa
MIT-Manus
Exp=robot therapy + CT (neurodevelopmental)
Control=robot exposure i.e. no active assistance from robot + CT (neurodevelopmental)
Exp=30–35 hours in 6–7 weeks
Control=6–7 hours in 6–7 weeks
Confidence intervals are incorrect for Aisen et al [29]/Volpe et al [32] in Table IIIa. The correct confidence intervals are as follows:
FMA – proximal −7.95, 7.35
FMA – distal −5.55, 5.55
Confidence intervals are incorrect for Lum et al [37] in Table IIIb. The correct confidence interval is as follows:
FMA – distal −3.96, 1.50
Confidence intervals are incorrect for Lum et al [40] in Table IIIb. The correct confidence interval is as follows:
FMA – distal −1.02, −0.38
Confidence intervals are incorrect for Masiero et al [36] in Table IIIc. The correct confidence interval is as follows:
FMA – proximal 3.14, 18.22
Text is missing under ‘Characteristics of participants’ and ‘Intervention’ for Hesse et al [27] in Table IIId. The following text should appear under ‘Characteristics of participants’:
n=39
Elbow/wrist
Exp=19
Con=20
Sub-acute
Severe
Pre, mid, post, 3 mth f/up
The following text should appear under ‘Intervention’:
AT
Exp=800 repetitions of AT in 4 different movement directions bilaterally + CT
Con=80 repetitions of EMG-stim of wrist extension + CT
20 mins/day for 6 weeks
Text is missing under ‘Characteristics of participants’ for Fransisco et al [43] in Table IV. The following text should appear under ‘Characteristics of participants’ regarding follow up time points:
Pre, post