Included papers were grouped into studies and data (on participants, interventions, outcomes at the latest time point to 53 weeks, trial quality characteristics and potential effect modifiers) were extracted independently by two reviewers onto a data extraction form refined by the entire review team.
All medical and monitoring data were collected on a routine basis using our software of choice (Qcare 4.6 Build 154/2, C3 Critical Care Company NV, Sint-Martens-Latem, Belgium), with subsequent analysis performed by means of a data extraction tool.
Data items to be extracted were agreed by all authors, and a data extraction database containing details of each study was developed by CB.
Data were systematically extracted using a data extraction form by individual project team members and verified by one other project team member.
Data from the included studies were extracted by author SLG into a data extraction sheet prepared for this study (see Electronic Supplementary Material (ESM) 1) and checked for accuracy by author SB.
Both descriptive and quantitative study- and patient-level data from accepted studies were extracted into a data extraction form by a single investigator and then reviewed against the original study by a second investigator.
Each article was independently read by two reviewers and a data extraction form completed.
Each study which met the inclusion criteria was independently read by two reviewers and a data extraction form completed which detailed the type of motor assessment, equipment used, method of assessment, scaling and results.
Study characteristics, prevalence, and risk factors, were extracted independently by SW and VE on a data extraction form that was piloted and modified prior to use.
Data were primarily extracted by one author (NI) and checked by the second author (AF) using a data extraction sheet classified with respect to design, objective, sample, measures, analysis and results/case description.
