Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25483800›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2015

Development of a patient-centred, patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for post-stroke cognitive rehabilitation: qualitative interviews with stroke survivors to inform design and content.

Emma L Patchick, Maria Horne, Kate Woodward-Nutt, Andy Vail, Audrey Bowen

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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.

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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Measuring the success of interventions for caregivers: a focussed systematic review.Current opinion in supportive and palliative care · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. A scoping review of patient and public involvement in empirical stroke research.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2024
    Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Emma L PatchickSchool of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
Maria HorneSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Health Studies, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK.
Kate Woodward-NuttSchool of Nursing, Midwifery & Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
Andy VailCentre for Biostatistics, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, UK.
Audrey BowenStroke Research, School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, CSB, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, UK.
Manchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBUniversity of Bradford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImproving cognition is service users' top research priority for life after stroke, and future research should include outcomes that they deem important. Patient perspectives on outcomes are collected using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). There is currently no patient-centred PROM specific for cognitive rehabilitation trials.

objectiveInform PROM development by exploring stroke survivor perspectives on the important, measurable impacts of persisting post-stroke cognitive problems.

designQualitative semi-structured interviews in participants' homes.

participantsPurposive sample of 16 cognitively impaired stroke survivors at least six months post-stroke.

methodsInterviews used a schedule and communication aids developed through patient consultation. Interviews were transcribed verbatim with non-verbal communication recorded using field notes. Data were analysed using a framework approach to find commonalities to shape the focus and content of an outcome measure.

resultsParticipants identified important impacts of their 'invisible' cognitive problems, outside of other stroke-related impairments. Cognitive problems exacerbated emotional issues and vice versa. Changes in self-identity and social participation were prominent. Impact was not spoken about in terms of frequency but rather in terms of the negative affect associated with problems; terms like 'bothered' and 'frustration' were often used.

conclusionsThe results support the development of a PROM specifically designed to address the impact of cognitive problems. It should: include items addressing a comprehensive range of cognitive skills; ask questions about mood, self-identity and social participation; use accessible wording that respondents understand and endorse; measure impact rather than frequency; and explore perceived impact on carers.

Indexed as

Patient-Centered CarePatient Outcome AssessmentStroke RehabilitationAdultCognition DisordersFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchStrokeSurvivorscognitionpatient-centredpatient-reported outcome measurepsychometricsqualitativestroke

Identifiers

PMID25483800
PMCPMC5810690
OpenAlexW2029929150

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.