ArticleBMC neurology2022
General and comparative self-rated health in chronic stroke: an important outcome measure for health professionals.
Article in BMC neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAfter a stroke, several aspects of health and function may influence how individuals perceive their own health. However, self-rated health (SRH), as well as its relationship with functioning, has been little explored in individuals with stroke. The aims of this study were to determine how individuals with chronic post-stroke disabilities evaluate their health, considering general, time- and age-comparative SRH questions and to investigate whether SRH measures would be influenced by the following health and functioning domains: mental/physical functions and personal factors.
methodsSixty-nine individuals with chronic post-stroke disabilities answered the three types of SRH questions and were assessed regarding depressive symptoms (emotional function domain), physical activity levels (physical function domain), and engagement in physical activity practice (personal factor domain). Subjects were divided into the following groups: good/poor for the general SRH question; better, similar, and "worse" for both time- and age-comparative questions. Between-group differences in the three domains for each SRH question were investigated (α = 5%).
resultsGeneral SRH was rated as good by 73% of the participants. Time- and age-comparative SRH was rated as better by 36% and 47% and as similar by 31% and 28% of the subjects, respectively. Significant between-group differences in emotional function were found for both the general and age-comparative questions. For the time-comparative question, significant differences were only observed for physical function.
conclusionSRH evaluation differed in individuals with chronic post-stroke disabilities according to the types of questions and health/functioning domains.
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.