Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35265314›Full record

ReviewParkinson's disease2022

Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation for People with Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Abubeker Alebachew Seid, Ertugrul Demirdel, Setognal Birara Aychiluhm, Ahmed Adem Mohammed

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Parkinson's disease, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Abubeker Alebachew SeidDepartment of Nursing, College of Medicine and Health Science, Samara University, Samara, Ethiopia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9171-3211
Ertugrul DemirdelDepartment Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7139-0523
Setognal Birara AychiluhmDepartment of Public Health, College of Medicine and Health Science, Samara University, Samara, Ethiopia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7565-7515
Ahmed Adem MohammedDepartment of Nursing, College of Medicine and Health Science, Samara University, Samara, Ethiopia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3257-1281
Samara University · ETAnkara Yıldırım Beyazıt University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Guidelines endorse to implement an integrated and multidisciplinary team approach in the management of people with Parkinson's disease (PD). However, there is no net and clear finding that shows the supremacy of multidisciplinary team interventions over conventional interventions for people with PD. Therefore, we perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the supremacy of multidisciplinary interventions for people with PD. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials were conducted. PubMed, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched from inception until May 2021. Randomized controlled trials comparing multidisciplinary intervention with conventional physiotherapy were included. The outcome measures were gait balance, disability status, quality of life, and depression level. The PEDro scale was used to systematically appraise methodological quality. Two reviewers screened, extracted, and performed a quality assessment of included studies independently. Review Manager V.5.4 (Cochrane Collaboration) software was used for statistical analysis. Heterogeneity was analyzed using I Results: A total of 6 studies with 1260 participants were included. The average PEDro methodological quality score was 6.67. No statistically significant difference between multidisciplinary and conventional rehabilitation on functional capacity (SMD: 0.69; 95% CI: -0.13, 1.51; Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis show no significant difference between multidisciplinary and conventional rehabilitation on functionality, disability, and quality of life. Caregivers' anxiety levels show improvement following multidisciplinary interventions. However, large-scale studies with long-term follow-up were required for concrete and clinical recommendations.

Identifiers

PMID35265314
PMCPMC8901313
OpenAlexW4214506578

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.