 It has been called for comparative effectiveness research of the innovative treatments to promote evidence-based practice and translational science in stroke motor rehabilitation. Scientific evidence for comparative effectiveness research of RR versus MT on functional outcomes e.g., motor, muscle, sensory, and daily functions and adverse physiological responses e.g., fatigue and oxidative responses in stroke patients is limited. More rigorous studies are needed to compare the efficacy of RR and MT with control intervention CI, to identify the predictors of treatment success, and to study change in functions motor, muscle, sensory, and daily and level of fatigue and oxidative stress after intense training in order to promote translational science in movement therapy. Therefore, this comparative efficacy research aims at performing a randomized controlled trial RCT to 1 verify the efficacy and motor control mechanisms of dose-matched RR, MT, and CI; 2 examine whether RR combined with FES will enhance the effect of RR; 3 study the predictors of treatment outcomes and clinimetric properties of the outcome measures. We hypothesize the RR and MT groups would produce better performance in motor control, muscle function, sensory function, daily functions, and quality of life than the CI group. We further hypothesize that there will be a differential improvements in movement performance and sensory functions between the RR and MT. Combined therapy of the RR and FES RR-FES will enhance the effect of RR as compared with the RR plus placebo intervention RR-PI. 