Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25414623›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of integrated care2014

Collaborative interaction points in post-discharge stroke care.

Nadia Davoody, Sabine Koch, Ingvar Krakau, Maria Hägglund

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of integrated care, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Nadia DavoodyHealth Informatics Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Sabine KochHealth Informatics Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics. Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ingvar KrakauDepartment of Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Maria HägglundHealth Informatics Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics. Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionLack of appropriate electronic tools for supporting patient involvement and collaboration with care professionals is a problem in health care.

methodsCare and rehabilitation processes of post-discharge stroke patients were analysed using the concept of interaction points where patients, next-of-kin and care professionals interact and exchange information. Thirteen interviews with care professionals and five non-participatory observations were performed. Data were analysed using content analysis and modelling of interaction points in the patient journey.

resultsPatient participation and interaction patterns vary; patients requiring home care have a passive role and next-of-kin or nurses become advocates by coordinating care on behalf of the patient, whereas patients who are able to visit primary care coordinate their own care by initiating interactions. Important categories of participation include the following: participation in care planning, in monitoring risk factors and in rehabilitation planning.

conclusionsDesigning a supportive electronic tool requires understanding the interactions and patients' activity levels at each interaction point. A tool for patients with higher activity level should support them to coordinate their own care, whereas for a less-active patient group, the tool could focus on supporting next-of-kin and care professionals in motivating, guiding and including passive patients in their care and rehabilitation processes.

Indexed as

care planningelectronic toolintegrated carepatient participationrehabilitationstroke

Identifiers

PMID25414623
PMCPMC4238053

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.