Table 3 Characteristics and analysis of the quality of the motor imagery interventions
| Â | Criteria of successful motor imagery interventions | Abraham et al. (2017) [63] | Bouguetoch et al. (2021) [64] | Christakou et al. (2007) [32] | Christakou & Zervas (2007) [31] | Deghan et al. (2013) [62] | Grospretre et al. (2017) [61] | Nagar & Noohu (2014) [60] | Nunes et al. (2015) [30] | Sidaway & Trzaska (2005) [29] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Were performed individual; | N | Y | Y | Y | NI | Y | Y | Y | Y |
2 | Were added after physical practice; | N | N | Y | Y | NI | N | Y | Y | N |
3 | Were supervised; | Y | Y | NI | Y | NI | Y | Y | NI | Y |
4 | Were not directed; | N | N | N | N | NI | N | N | N | N |
5 & 6 | The location of the MITS and position of the participants were task-specific; | Y | Y | Y | Y | NI | Y | Y | N | Y |
7 & 8 | The participants received acoustic and detailed MI instructions; | Y | Y | NI | Y | NI | Y | Y | N | Y |
9 | During MI the eyes were closed; | Y | NI | NI | NI | NI | NI | NI | N | Y |
10—12 | The used perspective during MI was an internal view with kinaesthetic mode and MI interventions included primarily motor-focused activities; | Y | Y | Y | Y | NI | Y | Y | N | Y |
13 | The average duration was 34Â days; | Y | N | Y | Y | NI | N | Y | NI | N |
14 | With a total of 3 MI training sessions per week; | N | Y | Y | Y | NI | Y | Y | Y | Y |
15 | And had an average duration of 17Â min per training session (total minimum 178Â min) | NI | N | Y | Y | NI | N | N | N | Y |
|  | Total score (items rated ‘Yes’) | 10 | 10 | 10 | 13 | 0 | 10 | 12 | 3 | 12 |