Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27633636›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2016

Protocol for process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial of family-led rehabilitation post stroke (ATTEND) in India.

Hueiming Liu, Richard Lindley, Mohammed Alim, Cynthia Felix, Dorcas B C Gandhi, Shweta J Verma, Deepak Kumar Tugnawat, Anuradha Syrigapu, Ramaprabhu Krishnappa Ramamurthy, Jeyaraj D Pandian and 10 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Early supported discharge services for people with acute stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

20 authors.

Hueiming LiuThe George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Richard LindleyThe George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Mohammed AlimGeorge Institute for Global Health, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Cynthia FelixChristian Medical College, Ludhiana, Punjab, India.
Dorcas B C GandhiChristian Medical College, Ludhiana, Punjab, India.
Shweta J VermaChristian Medical College, Ludhiana, Punjab, India.
Deepak Kumar TugnawatIndian Institute of Public Health, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Anuradha SyrigapuIndian Institute of Public Health, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Ramaprabhu Krishnappa RamamurthyCollege of Allied Health Sciences, Gulf Medical University, Ajman, UAE.
Jeyaraj D PandianChristian Medical College, Ludhiana, Punjab, India.
Marion WalkerUniversity of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Anne ForsterUniversity of Leeds, West Yorkshire, UK.
Craig S AndersonThe George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Peter LanghorneUniversity of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Gudlavalleti Venkata Satyanarayana MurthyIndian Institute of Public Health, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Bindiganavale Ramaswamy ShamannaSchool of Medical Sciences, University of Hyderabad, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Maree L HackettThe George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Pallab K MaulikGeorge Institute for Global Health, Hyderabad, Telangana, India The George Institute for Global Health, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.
Lisa A HarveySydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Stephen JanThe George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

DBT-Wellcome Trust India Alliance IA/I/13/1/500879Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWe are undertaking a randomised controlled trial (fAmily led rehabiliTaTion aftEr stroke in INDia, ATTEND) evaluating training a family carer to enable maximal rehabilitation of patients with stroke-related disability; as a potentially affordable, culturally acceptable and effective intervention for use in India. A process evaluation is needed to understand how and why this complex intervention may be effective, and to capture important barriers and facilitators to its implementation. We describe the protocol for our process evaluation to encourage the development of in-process evaluation methodology and transparency in reporting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The realist and RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance) frameworks informed the design. Mixed methods include semistructured interviews with health providers, patients and their carers, analysis of quantitative process data describing fidelity and dose of intervention, observations of trial set up and implementation, and the analysis of the cost data from the patients and their families perspective and programme budgets. These qualitative and quantitative data will be analysed iteratively prior to knowing the quantitative outcomes of the trial, and then triangulated with the results from the primary outcome evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The process evaluation has received ethical approval for all sites in India. In low-income and middle-income countries, the available human capital can form an approach to reducing the evidence practice gap, compared with the high cost alternatives available in established market economies. This process evaluation will provide insights into how such a programme can be implemented in practice and brought to scale. Through local stakeholder engagement and dissemination of findings globally we hope to build on patient-centred, cost-effective and sustainable models of stroke rehabilitation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CTRI/2013/04/003557.

Indexed as

Developing CountriesEvaluation Studies as TopicFamilyProcess Assessment, Health CareStrokeStroke RehabilitationAttitude of Health PersonnelCaregiversCost-Benefit AnalysisHealth ExpendituresHumansIndiaPersons with DisabilitiesResearch DesignQUALITATIVE RESEARCHREHABILITATION MEDICINE

Identifiers

PMID27633636
PMCPMC5030603

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.