Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35677783›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Assessments of a novel digital follow-up tool Rehabkompassen

Xiaolei Hu, Karolina Jonzén, Marcus Karlsson, Olof A Lindahl

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04915027 (Rehabkompassen® - a Novel Digital Tool for Facilitating Patient-tailored Rehabilitation in the Post-acute Continuum of Care After Stroke - A Multicenter Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT04915027 narecruitingnot on this map

Rehabkompassen® - a Novel Digital Tool for Facilitating Patient-tailored Rehabilitation in the Post-acute Continuum of Care After Stroke - A Multicenter Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUmeå UniversityRan2020 to 2027Enrolled1,106ConditionsStrokeArmsa usual follow-up with Rehabkompassen®, a usual follow-up with Post-Stroke Checklist, i.e. without Rehabkompassen®
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A scoping review of patient and public involvement in empirical stroke research.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Xiaolei HuDepartment of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9864-7432
Karolina JonzénDepartment of Radiation Sciences, Radiation Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Marcus KarlssonDepartment of Radiation Sciences, Radiation Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Olof A LindahlDepartment of Radiation Sciences, Radiation Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9665-791X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: It remains a huge challenge to identify individual rehabilitation needs in a time-efficient manner for providing patient-tailored rehabilitation during the continuum of stroke care. We have recently demonstrated the usefulness of a paper-version Rehab-Compass as a follow-up tool. The aim of the current study was to develop a digital version of the Rehab-Compass and evaluate its usability and feasibility. Methods: The novel digital tool Rehabkompassen Results: Rehabkompassen Conclusions: The current results indicated that Rehabkompassen

Indexed as

digital tooleHealthfeasibilityfollow-upneed assessmentoutcome assessmentoutpatient settingStroke rehabilitationusability

Identifiers

PMID35677783
PMCPMC9168944

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.