Observational studyMedicine2016
Patient- and Hospital-Level Determinants of Rehabilitation for In-Patient Stroke Care: An Observation Analysis.
Observational study in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During acute stroke care, rehabilitation usage may be influenced by patient- and hospital-related factors. We would like to identify patient- and hospital-level determinants of population-level inpatient rehabilitation usage associated with acute stroke care.From data obtained from the claim information from the National Health Insurance Administration (NHIA) in Taiwan (2009-2011), we enrolled 82,886 stroke patients with intracerebral hemorrhage and cerebral infarction from 207 hospitals. A generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) analyses with patient-level factors specified as random effects were conducted (for cross-level interactions).The rate of rehabilitation usage was 51% during acute stroke care. The hospital-related factors accounted for a significant amount of variability (intraclass correlation, 50%). Hospital type was the only significant hospital-level variable and can explain the large amount of variability (58%). Patients treated in smaller hospitals experienced few benefits of rehabilitation services, and those with surgery in a smaller hospital used fewer rehabilitation services. All patient-level variables were significant.With GLMM analyses, we identified the hospital type and its cross-level interaction, and explained a large portion of variability in rehabilitation for stroke patients in Taiwan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.