ArticleNeuroRehabilitation2016
Selection and visualisation of outcome measures for complex post-acute acquired brain injury rehabilitation interventions.
Article in NeuroRehabilitation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Information visualizations of symptom information for patients and providers: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019Pooled it
- The Efficacy of Integrated Rehabilitation for Post-Stroke Anxiety: Study Protocol for a Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial.International journal of general medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOutcome measurement challenges rehabilitation services to select tools that promote stakeholder engagement in measuring complex interventions.
objectivesTo examine the suitability of outcome measures for complex post-acute acquired brain injury (ABI) rehabilitation interventions, report outcomes of a holistic, neuropsychological ABI rehabilitation program and propose a simple way of visualizing complex outcomes.
methodsPatient/carer reported outcome measures (PROMS), experience measures (PREMS) and staff-rated measures were collected for consecutive admissions over 1 year to an 18-week holistic, neuropsychological rehabilitation programme at baseline, 18 weeks and 3- and 6-month follow-up.
resultsEngagement with outcome measurement was poorest for carers and at follow-up for all stakeholders. Dependence, abilities, adjustment, unmet needs, symptomatology including executive dysfunction, and self-reassurance showed improvements at 18 weeks. Adjustment, social participation, perceived health, symptomatology including dysexecutive difficulties, and anxiety were worse at baseline for those who did not complete rehabilitation, than those who did. A radar plot facilitated outcome visualization.
conclusionsEngagement with outcome measurement was best when time and support were provided. Supplementing patient- with staff-rated and attendance measures may explain missing data and help quantify healthcare needs. The MPAI4, EBIQ and DEX-R appeared suitable measures to evaluate outcomes and distinguish those completing and not completing neuropsychological rehabilitation.
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.