Table 1 Characteristics of all included studies

From: A systematic review of observational practice for adaptation of reaching movements

Study ID

 

Participants

    

Authors (year)

Study design

Device

Sample size

Female, %

Mean age [Age range]

Handedness

Bernardi et al. 38

RCT

Manipulandum

42

/

20.6 [SD = 2.7]

Ra

Brown et al. 39

Quasi experimental trial

Manipulandum

54

/

NA

Ra

Brown et al. 40

Quasi experimental trial

Manipulandum

111

/

Undergraduate students

Ra

Larssen et al. 49

RCT

Graphical tablet

32

56.3

21.8 [SD = 1.6]

Ra

Larssen et al. 50

RCT

Graphical tablet

93

73.1

23.0 [SD = 5.6]

Ra,b

Lei, et al. 54

RCT

Exo-skeleton

40

42.5

NA [18 - 30]

R

Lim et al. 51

RCT

Graphical tablet

49

61.2

21.6 [SD = 3.7]

Rb

Mattar and Gribble41

RCT

Manipulandum

84

52.4

21.0 [SE = 0.4]

Ra

McGregor et al. 42

Quasi experimental trial

Manipulandum

30

60

22.7 [SE = 0.9]

Ra

McGregor et al. 43

Quasi experimental trial

Manipulandum

112

64.3

20.7 [SE = 0.4]

Ra

McGregor et al. 44

Quasi experimental trial

Manipulandum

30

60

22.7 [SE = 0.9]

Ra

McGregor, et al. 45

Quasi experimental trial

Manipulandum

78

68.0

21.3 [SE = 0.6]

Ra

McGregor, et al. 46

Quasi experimental trial

Manipulandum

32

71.9

21.5 [SE = 0.7]

Ra

Ronchi et al. 55

Quasi experimental trial

Reaching board

66

67.0

27.4 [18 - 55]

R

Ong et al. 52

RCT

Graphical tablet

30

53.3

25.8 [SD = 4.1]

Rb

Ong et al. 53

RCT

Graphical tablet

29

51.7

23.2 [SD = 5.6]

Ra

Wanda et al. 47

Quasi experimental trial

Manipulandum

50

60

[18-38]

Rb

Williams and Gribble48

RCT

Manipulandum

60

/

18.5 [SE = 1.0]

Rc

  1. RCT randomized controlled trial, SD standard deviation, SE standard error, R right handed.
  2. aself-reported.
  3. bEdinburgh Handedness Inventory87.
  4. cDutch Handedness Questionnaire88.