SynthesisBMJ open2016
Process evaluations in neurological rehabilitation: a mixed-evidence systematic review and recommendations for future research.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- The application of the RE-AIM and PRISM framework to process evaluations of diabetes self-management programs: a systematic review and secondary analysis of literature.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Process Evaluations of Diabetes Self-Management Programs: A Systematic Review of the Literature.American journal of health promotion : AJHP · 2024Pooled it
- What do we want to get out of this? a critical interpretive synthesis of the value of process evaluations, with a practical planning framework.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Process evaluations of primary care interventions addressing chronic disease: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2019Pooled it
- An EEG Tool for Monitoring Patient Engagement during Stroke Rehabilitation: A Feasibility Study.BioMed research international · 2017Trial
- Article
- OptiCogs: feasibility of a multicomponent intervention to rehabilitate people with cognitive impairment post-stroke.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2023Article
- Early and Intensive Motor Training for people with spinal cord injuries (the SCI-MT Trial): protocol of the process evaluation.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Process evaluations undertaken alongside randomised controlled trials in the hospital setting: A scoping review.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2022Article
- Article
- The generation of consensus guidelines for carrying out process evaluations in rehabilitation research.BMC medical research methodology · 2018Article
- Development of the Better Balance Program for People with Multiple Sclerosis: A Complex Fall-Prevention Intervention.International journal of MS careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically review how process evaluations are currently designed, what methodologies are used and how are they developed alongside or within neurological rehabilitation trials.
methodsThis mixed-methods systematic review had two evidence streams: stream I, studies reporting process evaluations alongside neurorehabilitation trials research and stream II, methodological guidance on process evaluation design and methodology. A search strategy was designed for each evidence stream. Data regarding process evaluation core concepts and design issues were extracted using a bespoke template. Evidence from both streams was analysed separately and then synthesised in a final overarching synthesis proposing a number of recommendations for future research.
resultsA total of 124 process evaluation studies, reporting on 106 interventions, were included in stream I evidence. 30 studies were included as stream II evidence. Synthesis 1 produced 9 themes, and synthesis 2 identified a total of 8 recommendations for process evaluation research. The overall synthesis resulted in 57 'synthesis recommendations' about process evaluation methodology grouped into 9 research areas, including the use of theory, the investigation of context, intervention staff characteristics and the delivery of the trial intervention.
conclusionsThere remains no consensus regarding process evaluation terminology within the neurological rehabilitation field. There is a need for process evaluations to address the nature and influence of context over time. Process evaluations should clearly describe what intervention staff bring to a trial, including skills and experience prior to joining the research. Process evaluations should monitor intervention staff's learning effects and the possible impact that these may have on trial outcomes.
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.