Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33906841›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2021

Experiences and views of receiving and delivering information about recovery in acquired neurological conditions: a systematic review of qualitative literature.

Louisa-Jane Burton, Anne Forster, Judith Johnson, Thomas F Crocker, Sarah F Tyson, Faye Wray, David J Clarke

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Information provision for stroke survivors and their carers.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Louisa-Jane BurtonAcademic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK louisa.burton@bthft.nhs.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-3617-1410
Anne ForsterAcademic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7466-4414
Judith JohnsonSchool of Psychology, University of Leeds Faculty of Biological Sciences, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0431-013X
Thomas F CrockerAcademic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7450-3143
Sarah F TysonDivision of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6301-8791
Faye WrayAcademic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9351-5019
David J ClarkeAcademic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6279-1192
University of Leeds · GBBradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Manchester · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo review and synthesise qualitative literature relating to the views, perceptions and experiences of patients with acquired neurological conditions and their caregivers about the process of receiving information about recovery; as well as the views and experiences of healthcare professionals involved in delivering this information.

designSystematic review of qualitative studies. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science and the Cochrane library were searched from their inception to July 2019. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers extracted data from the included studies and assessed quality using an established tool. Thematic synthesis was used to synthesise the findings of included studies.

resultsSearches yielded 9105 titles, with 145 retained for full-text screening. Twenty-eight studies (30 papers) from eight countries were included. Inductive analysis resulted in 11 descriptive themes, from which 5 analytical themes were generated: the right information at the right time; managing expectations; it's not what you say, it's how you say it; learning how to talk about recovery and manage emotions; the context of uncertainty.

conclusionsOur findings highlight the inherent challenges in talking about recovery in an emotional context, where breaking bad news is a key feature. Future interventions should focus on preparing staff to meet patients' and families' information needs, as well as ensuring they have the skills to discuss potential recovery and break bad news compassionately and share the uncertain trajectory characteristic of acquired neurological conditions. An agreed team-based approach to talking about recovery is recommended to ensure consistency and improve the experiences of patients and their families.

Indexed as

CaregiversHealth PersonnelHumansQualitative Researchadult neurologyneurological injuryrehabilitation medicine

Identifiers

PMID33906841
PMCPMC8088240
OpenAlexW3157804074

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.