## 3 Results  
Table 1 presents the descriptive statistics of the tested parameters: CI and JERK in the experimental group (PRE/POST) and a single study in the control group. Table 2 shows the results of the statistical significance between the PRE and POST tests in the EXP group, while Table 3 presents the results of statistical significance of the POST test in the EXP group with the test in the CON group. In the experimental group, there are large discrepanciesin the mean value in the CI further parameter (see Table 1) between the results of PRE (\(66.20\pm 14.80\)) and POST (\(52.70\pm 14.80\)). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Mean/SD**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Min**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Max**} \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Pre} & CI Closer & \(62.50\pm 18.40\) & 28.80 & 87.10 \\ \cline{2-5}  & CI Further & \(66.20\pm 14.80\) & 50.00 & 88.80 \\ \cline{2-5}  & CI Contralaterally & \(64.60\pm 20.40\) & 29.80 & 88.80 \\ \cline{2-5}  & CI Ipsilaterally & \(62.60\pm 15.90\) & 40.70 & 87.00 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Jerk Closer & \(0.28\pm 0.14\) & 0.12 & 0.54 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Jerk Further & \(0.75\pm 0.57\) & 0.10 & 1.77 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Jerk Contralaterally & \(0.61\pm 0.51\) & 0.18 & 1.53 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Jerk Ipsilaterally & \(0.61\pm 0.54\) & 0.10 & 1.79 \\ \cline{2-5}  & CI Closer & \(51\pm 6.50\) & 31.20 & 78.50 \\ \cline{2-5}  & CI Further & \(52.70\pm 14.80\) & 31.60 & 78.40 \\ \cline{2-5}  & CI Contralaterally & \(55.60\pm 15.30\) & 36.40 & 77.20 \\ \cline{2-5}  & CI Ipsilaterally & \(51.80\pm 17.10\) & 30.10 & 77.80 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Jerk Closer & \(0.11\pm 0.10\) & 0.03 & 0.33 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Jerk Further & \(0.26\pm 0.13\) & 0.10 & 0.54 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Jerk Contralaterally & \(0.21\pm 0.12\) & 0.09 & 0.41 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Jerk Ipsilaterally & \(0.19\pm 0.05\) & 0.10 & 0.25 \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{CON} & CI Closer & \(57.40\pm 6.23\) & 49.60 & 69.4 \\ \cline{2-5}  & CI Further & \(44.40\pm 1.21\) & 42.90 & 46.7 \\ \cline{2-5}  & CI Contralaterally & \(59.50\pm 5.52\) & 52.60 & 70.2 \\ \cline{2-5}  & CI Ipsilaterally & \(50.60\pm 4.47\) & 45.00 & 59.2 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Jerk Closer & \(0.12\pm 0.03\) & 0.06 & 0.14 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Jerk Further & \(0.29\pm 0.13\) & 0.14 & 0.52 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Jerk Contralaterally & \(0.14\pm 0.05\) & 0.08 & 0.23 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Jerk Ipsilaterally & \(0.17\pm 0.07\) & 0.08 & 0.30 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Descriptive statistics of CI and Jerk parameters in the experimental group (PRE/POST) and the control group. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **W** & \(p\) & \begin{tabular}{c} **Mean** \\ **Difference** \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **SE** \\ **Difference** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Cohen’s d** \\ **Effect Size** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline CI Closer & 2.00 & 0.09 & 11.42 & 5.71 & 0.71 \\ \hline
**CI Further** & **2.44** & **0.04** & **13.49** & **5.53** & **0.86** \\ \hline CI Contralaterally & 1.62 & 0.15 & 8.99 & 5.53 & 0.57 \\ \hline CI Ipsilaterally & 1.74 & 0.13 & 10.83 & 6.22 & 0.62 \\ \hline
**Jerk Closer** & **5.98** & **\textless{}0.01** & **0.17** & **0.03** & **2.11** \\ \hline
**Jerk Further** & **2.52** & **0.04** & **0.49** & **0.20** & **0.89** \\ \hline Jerk Contralaterally & 2.12 & 0.07 & 0.41 & 0.19 & 0.75 \\ \hline Jerk Ipsilaterally & 2.22 & 0.06 & 0.42 & 0.19 & 0.79 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Results of the statistical difference analysis in paired sample \(t\)-test, \(\text{pre}/\text{post}\) rehabilitation trial in experimental group. The results of this study were also statistically significantly different (\(W=2.44\), \(p\leq 0.04\)), which are presented in Table 2. Large discrepancies also occurred in the mean values of the results of the jerk closer PRE (\(0.28\pm 0.14\)) and POST (\(0.11\pm 0.10\)) and the parameters of jerk further PRE (\(0.75\pm 0.57\)) and POST (\(0.26\pm 0.13\)) (Table 1).