A strength of this review is the integration of laboratory-based expectancy paradigms with clinically embedded studies across multiple long-term conditions. Detailed extraction of statistical approach

The gap

Consensus across the literature

Supporting evidence — 3 representative gaps

• mHealth Interventions for Stroke Recovery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Motor and Functional Improvements (2026) · doi

  non-English publications and potential underreporting of negative or References: independent exclusion include of therapist-led sessions, while others were entirely self- administered, contributing to heterogeneity (I² = [14,16,17] Few studies provided detailed 75.4%). adherence data or long-term outcome follow-up, leaving gaps in understanding sustained use and real- world effectiveness. This review contributes to the existing literature by focusing specifically on stroke- related motor and functional outcomes, addressing a narrower scope than broader digital health reviews. [15, 21] tools Clinically, the moderate effect size reported has meaningful can implications. mHealth complement conventional rehabilitation by providing structured, flexible, and often home-based support, which may improve therapy adherence. The ability to remotely monitor progress and personalize exercises makes these interventions practical in both urban and remote settings. [4,5,11] However, clear guidelines on dosage, progression, and therapist involvement are lacking and must be established to optimize their integration into physiotherapy practice. [14,24] null results, which may affect the comprehensiveness of included evidence. [20,25] The findings are in agreement with previous systematic reviews such as those by Cao et al. (2024) and Rintala et al. (2023), which reported moderate benefits of mHealth interventions on stroke recovery. [7, 9] While the effect sizes in our analysis align with those reported by Cao et al. (0.5–0.6), heterogeneity remains a consistent concern across studies. These results also echo meta-analytic findings in related domains, such as Zhou et al. (2023), which identified similar levels of variability in mHealth effects on blood pressure control.[26]

  Keywords: reported mhealth therapist heterogeneity adherence stroke related reviews moderate effect interventions english publications potential underreporting
• Nocebo effects in long-term health conditions: a systematic review of experimental studies (2026) · doi

  A strength of this review is the integration of laboratory-based expectancy paradigms with clinically embedded studies across multiple long-term conditions. Detailed extraction of statistical approaches and moderator analyses enhances transparency regard- ing evidential strength. The inclusion of both subjective and physiological outcomes allows consideration of mechanis- tic breadth. Limitations include heterogeneity of design and outcome mea- surement, inconsistent reporting of standardised effect sizes, and generally modest sample sizes. The absence of meta-analysis limits quantitative precision. Additionally, many studies examined short- term or experimentally induced outcomes rather than long-term disease trajectories, constraining inference regarding sustained clinical impact. Methodologically, several features constrain interpretation. Standardised effect sizes were infrequently reported, despite statis- tically significant findings in multiple studies, with most analyses relying on p-values, F statistics, or regression coefficients without accompanying standardised indices (24–26, 30–32, 35). This limits cross-study comparison and precludes quantitative synthesis. Sample sizes were often modest, particularly in laboratory-based paradigms, increasing vulnerability to both Type I and Type II error. Designs varied considerably, including analogue online studies, laboratory induction paradigms, and clinical trials embed- ded within treatment contexts. While this enhances ecological breadth, it reduces methodological uniformity. The search strategy was intentionally anchored to the concep- tual construct of the nocebo effect rather than to a broad array of loosely related expectancy terms. This approach prioritised con- ceptual specificity and theoretical coherence. However, variability in terminology across clinical and experimental literatures means that

  Keywords: sizes laboratory paradigms term standardised effect clinical strength based expectancy across multiple long analyses enhances
• Impact of Yoga on Spinal Mobility and Psychological Outcomes in Patients with Axial Spondyloarthritis: A Prospective Non-randomized Controlled Study (2026) · doi

  The study has several limitations that should be considered when interpreting the findings. First, the non-randomized study design limits causal inference and does not fully exclude selection bias. Although baseline characteristics were largely comparable between the intervention groups, unmeasured confounding factors may have influenced the observed effects. Blinding of participants and intervention providers was not feasible due to the nature of the inter- ventions, and blinded outcome assessment was not imple- mented. Second, the intervention period of eight weeks was relatively short. While this duration was sufficient to detect changes in mobility and psychological outcomes, longer intervention periods may be necessary to achieve more pro- nounced or sustained effects on disease activity and generic physical quality-of-life measures. No formal sample size calculation was performed. In addition, physiotherapy reflected routine standard care and was less standardized than the yoga intervention with regard to content, intensity, and supervision, which limits direct comparability between interventions. The sample size was moderate, particularly for subgroup analyses and com- parisons with healthy participants. Several outcomes were associated with relatively wide confidence intervals that partly overlapped between groups, indicating limited pre- cision of the estimated effects and a degree of uncertainty in between-group comparisons. Incomplete data for some outcome measures may have reduced statistical power and contributed to uncertainty in individual estimates. Base- line differences in BASDAI between groups indicate that the control group may have been more severely affected at study entry, which further limits comparability and may have influenced the observed effects. To address baseline differences, additional baseline-adjusted sensitivity analy- ses were performed; the overall interpretation remained broadly comparable, although significance levels changed for some secondary outcomes. The observed significant decrease in kinesiophobia in yoga-treated patients, contrasted with a significant increase in TSK2 in healthy individuals that was not reflected in the Several outcomes, including physical activity and health competences, were assessed using self-reported question- naires, which may be subject to recall and reporting bias. 1 3Rheumatology International (2026) 46:162  162 Page 12 of 15 These factors may limit the generalizability of the find- ings to broader axSpA populations and to other healthcare settings. Future studies should employ randomized controlled designs with larger sample sizes and extended follow-up periods to confirm and expand the present findings. Direct comparisons between yoga and standardized physiotherapy or other exercise-based interventions are needed, because conventional physiotherapy and yoga differ in their under- lying therapeutic mechanisms, particularly with respect to psychological outcomes, which have so far received limited systematic attention in exercise-based intervention research in axSpA. The integration of objective activity measures and inflammatory markers may further help to identify patient subgroups that benefit most from mind–body interventions.

  Keywords: intervention outcomes effects yoga several limits baseline groups observed activity measures sample physiotherapy interventions randomized