ReviewBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2021
An Integrative Review Considering the Impact of Storytelling and Sharing Interventions in Stroke.
Review in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unique Needs and Challenges Experienced by Young People With Stroke: An International Qualitative Analysis.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2025Article
- Stroke and liminality: narratives of reconfiguring identity after stroke and their implications for person-centred stroke care.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2024Article
- Overcoming the monster! Perceptions of physiotherapy students regarding the use of stroke master plots for building therapeutic relationships; a vignette study.BMC medical education · 2023Article
- Co-creating Digital Stories With UK-Based Stroke Survivors With the Aim of Synthesizing Collective Lessons From Individual Experiences of Interacting With Healthcare Professionals.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReview-based research is needed which can establish the psychosocial outcomes and mechanisms of "storytelling and sharing" interventions for people with stroke. This information will act to inform the value and development of such interventions.
methodsAn integrative review was conducted in three stages: (a) a systematic search strategy was undertaken to focus on articles between 2009 until January 2020 to locate articles the considered storytelling and sharing interventions for people diagnosed with stroke; (b) critical appraisal was undertaken to assess study quality; and (c) synthesis within three stages including data reduction, data display and conclusion.
resultsFourteen articles (including 727 participants) were identified that met the eligibility criteria. Five themes were identified that represented the outcome and mechanisms that appeared to be associated with a stroke intervention. These included introducing the concept of hope and learning to be positive, the enhanced ability to cope, the impact of loneliness and social interaction, impact on emotions, depression and related emotions such as fear.
conclusionsStorytelling interventions appear to impact loneliness, introduce positivity and hope and enable coping through knowledge exchange. The main mechanisms which appeared to influence these outcomes were social comparisons and social control.
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.