SynthesisQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2022
Quality of mobility measures among individuals with acquired brain injury: an umbrella review.
Synthesis in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06867081 (Effectiveness of a Customized Digital Platform to Increase Coordination of Care and Uptake of Evidence-based Practices), which is not on this 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.
Effectiveness of a Customized Digital Platform to Increase Coordination of Care and Uptake of Evidence-based Practices: a Protocol for a Stepped-wedge Cluster Randomized Trial in Quebec
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Applications of ICF-Based Assessments and Interventions in Post-Stroke Rehabilitation: A Narrative Review.NeuroRehabilitation · 2026Review
- Evidence-based nursing interventions in cognitive dysfunction among adults with brain injury: a quasi-experiment.Journal of global health · 2025Article
- Informing the development of an outcome set and banks of items to measure mobility among individuals with acquired brain injury using natural language processing.BMC neurology · 2022Article
- Biomedical Research and Informatics Living Laboratory for Innovative Advances of New Technologies in Community Mobility Rehabilitation: Protocol for Evaluation and Rehabilitation of Mobility Across Continuums of Care.JMIR research protocols · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveWhile several mobility measures exist, there is large variability across measures in how mobility is conceptualized, the source of information and the measurement properties making it challenging to select relevant mobility measures for individuals with acquired brain injury (ABI). Therefore, the objective was to conduct a comprehensive synthesis of existing evidence on the measurement properties, the interpretability and the feasibility of mobility measures from various sources of information (patients, clinicians, technology) using an umbrella review of published systematic reviews among individuals with ABI.
methodsOvid MEDLINE, CINHAL, Cochrane Library and EMBASE electronic databases were searched from 2000 to March 2020. Two independent reviewers appraised the methodological quality of the systematic reviews using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist. Measurement properties and quality of evidence were applied according to COnsensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instrument (COSMIN) guidelines. Mobility measures were categorized using international standards with the international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF).
resultsThirty-five systematic reviews were included covering 147 mobility measures, of which 85% were mapped to the ICF Activity and Participation component. Results showed an acceptable overall "sufficient" rating for reliability, construct validity and responsiveness for 132 (90%), 127 (86%) and 76 (52%) of the measures, respectively; however, among these measures, ≤ 25% of the methods for evaluating these properties were rated as 'high' quality of evidence. Also, there was limited information that supports measure feasibility and scoring interpretability.
conclusionsFuture systematic reviews should report measures' content validity to support the use of the measure in clinical care and research. More evaluations of the minimal important difference and floor and ceiling effects are needed to help guide clinical interpretation. REGISTRATION INFORMATION: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO); ID: CRD42018100068.
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.