Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This review differed from prior meta-analyses by requiring baseline anaemia, including multiple neuro-critical illness populations, and analyzing the full GOS spectrum. Study quality will be assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools, with studies categorised as high, medium, or low quality. Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria, and six were eligible for meta-analysis. The review followed PRISMA guidance and searched eight databases. The meta-analysis pooled evidence from 18 RCTs comprising 954 stroke survivors using random-effects models with standardised mean differences for all continuous outcomes. The review included 26 studies after screening 14,438 records. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Most included studies were rated high quality, and none were rated low quality. Cohort quality will be assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and classified as high, moderate, or low. Significant heterogeneity in WMFT (I²=81%), spasticity (I²=92%), and MBI (I²=75%) reduces confidence in the pooled estimates for those outcomes. Studies labelled pulmonary embolism were retained unless they clearly involv…