Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28002479›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

RecoverNow: Feasibility of a Mobile Tablet-Based Rehabilitation Intervention to Treat Post-Stroke Communication Deficits in the Acute Care Setting.

Karen H Mallet, Rany M Shamloul, Dale Corbett, Hillel M Finestone, Simon Hatcher, Jim Lumsden, Franco Momoli, Michel C F Shamy, Grant Stotts, Richard H Swartz and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Unraveling acceptance of healthcare innovations in neurorehabilitation: results from a discrete choice experiment.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. [Use of smartphone apps in secondary stroke prevention].Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2020
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

12 authors.

Karen H MalletChamplain Regional Stroke Network, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0222-2638
Rany M ShamloulOttawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Dale CorbettBrain and Mind Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Hillel M FinestoneBrain and Mind Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Simon HatcherBrain and Mind Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Jim LumsdenChamplain Regional Stroke Network, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Franco MomoliOttawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Michel C F ShamyThe Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Grant StottsThe Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Richard H SwartzUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Christine YangBrain and Mind Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Dar DowlatshahiThe Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundApproximately 40% of patients diagnosed with stroke experience some degree of aphasia. With limited health care resources, patients' access to speech and language therapies is often delayed. We propose using mobile-platform technology to initiate early speech-language therapy in the acute care setting. For this pilot, our objective was to assess the feasibility of a tablet-based speech-language therapy for patients with communication deficits following acute stroke.

methodsWe enrolled consecutive patients admitted with a stroke and communication deficits with NIHSS score ≥1 on the best language and/or dysarthria parameters. We excluded patients with severe comprehension deficits where communication was not possible. Following baseline assessment by a speech-language pathologist (SLP), patients were provided with a mobile tablet programmed with individualized therapy applications based on the assessment, and instructed to use it for at least one hour per day. Our objective was to establish feasibility by measuring recruitment rate, adherence rate, retention rate, protocol deviations and acceptability.

resultsOver 6 months, 143 patients were admitted with a new diagnosis of stroke: 73 had communication deficits, 44 met inclusion criteria, and 30 were enrolled into RecoverNow (median age 62, 26.6% female) for a recruitment rate of 68% of eligible participants. Participants received mobile tablets at a mean 6.8 days from admission [SEM 1.6], and used them for a mean 149.8 minutes/day [SEM 19.1]. In-hospital retention rate was 97%, and 96% of patients scored the mobile tablet-based communication therapy as at least moderately convenient 3/5 or better with 5/5 being most "convenient".

conclusionsIndividualized speech-language therapy delivered by mobile tablet technology is feasible in acute care.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAphasiaComputers, HandheldCritical CareFeasibility StudiesFemaleHospitalizationHumansLanguage TherapyMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CareStroke

Identifiers

PMID28002479
PMCPMC5176170

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.