Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18425928›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2008

Therapy-based rehabilitation services for patients living at home more than one year after stroke.

N A Aziz, J Leonardi-Bee, M Phillips, J R F Gladman, L Legg, M F Walker

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01600391 (Visual Cue Training to Improve Walking and Turning After Stroke), which is not on this map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01600391 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2012, after this paper: background citation

Visual Cue Training to Improve Walking and Turning After Stroke: a Pilot Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of SalfordRan2012 to 2014Enrolled60ConditionsStrokeArmsUsual care, Overground visual cue training, Treadmill visual cue training
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 109 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Interventions for improving upper limb function after stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Rehabilitation services and related health databases, Japan.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

N A AzizUniversiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Department of Family Medicine, Medical Faculty, Cheras, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 53000. azah@mail.hukm.ukm.my
J Leonardi-Bee
M Phillips
J R F Gladman
L Legg
M F Walker
Queen's Medical Centre · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GBGlasgow Royal Infirmary · GBUniversity Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre · MY

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent practice of rehabilitation intervention mainly concentrates on the first six months of stroke. At present, there is no agreed consensus about the benefits of such a service more than one year after stroke.

objectivesTo ascertain whether therapy-based rehabilitation services can influence outcome one year or more after stroke. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the trials registers of the following Cochrane Review Groups: Stroke Group (last searched September 2007), Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (last searched October 2006) and Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (last searched October 2006). We also searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2006), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2006), EMBASE (1980 to October 2006), CINAHL (1982 to October 2006), AMED (1985 to October 2006), PEDro (1952 to October 2006), British Nursing Index (1993 to October 2006), DARE (1994 to October 2006), HMIC (1979 to October 2006) and NHS EED (1991 to October 2006). We also searched dissertation databases and ongoing trials and research registers, scanned reference lists and contacted researchers and experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials of community-based stroke patients, in which at least 75% were recruited one year after stroke and received a therapy-based rehabilitation intervention that was compared with conventional care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials and extracted data on a number of pre-specified outcomes. The primary outcomes were the proportion of participants who had deteriorated or were dependent in personal activities of daily living at the end of scheduled follow up. MAIN

resultsWe identified five trials of 487 participants that were eligible for the review. Overall, there was inconclusive evidence as to whether therapy-based rehabilitation intervention one year after stroke was able to influence any relevant patient or carer outcome. Trials varied in design, type of interventions provided, quality, and outcomes assessed. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThis review highlights the dearth of evidence investigating long-term therapy-based rehabilitation interventions for patients with stroke.

Indexed as

Long-Term CareOutpatientsHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRecovery of FunctionStrokeStroke RehabilitationTime FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID18425928
PMCPMC6464721
OpenAlexW1505958044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.