Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34505014›Full record

ArticleChronic diseases and translational medicine2021

Self-management interventions for adults with stroke: A scoping review.

Suebsarn Ruksakulpiwat, Wendie Zhou

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Chronic diseases and translational medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The dyadic self-care experience of stroke survivors and their caregivers: A qualitative descriptive study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    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

2 authors.

Suebsarn RuksakulpiwatMedical Nursing Department, Faculty of Nursing, Mahidol University, 2 Prannok Road, Siriraj, Wanglang, Bangkoknoi, Bangkok, Thailand.
Wendie ZhouThe Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, Heilongjiang 150086, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStroke is a principal cause of mortality and disability globally. Numerous studies have contributed to the knowledge base regarding self-management interventions among chronic disease patients, but there are few such studies for patients with stroke. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze self-management interventions among stroke patients. This scoping review aimed to systematically identify and describe randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of self-management interventions for adults with stroke.

methodsA review team carried out a scoping review on stroke and self-management interventions based on the methodology of Arksey and O'Malley, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL Plus Full Text, Medline Plus Full Text, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to July 2020.

resultsFifty-four RCTs were included. The most popular study design is comparing a self-management intervention to usual care or waitlist control condition. Physical activity is the most common intervention topic, and interventions were mainly delivered face to face. The majority of interventions were located in inpatient and multiple settings. Interventions were conducted by various providers, with nurses the most common provider group. Symptom management was the most frequently reported outcome domain that improved.

conclusionsSelf-management interventions benefit the symptom management of stroke patients a lot. The reasonable time for intervention is at least 6-12 months. Multifarious intervention topics, delivery formats, and providers are adopted mostly to meet the multiple needs of this population. Physical activity was the most popular topic currently. Studies comparing the effect of different types of self-management interventions are required in the future.

Indexed as

InterventionSelf managementStroke

Identifiers

PMID34505014
PMCPMC8413126

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.