ArticleScientific reports2022
The French EVAL-PLH cohort of persons with polyhandicap.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality of life among individuals with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities: crossed perspectives of institutional caregivers and parents.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2025Trial
- Increased Life Expectancy of People With Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities: What Does It Change for Parents?Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 2025Trial
- Health care management adequacy among French persons with severe profound intellectual and multiple disabilities: a longitudinal study.BMC health services research · 2024Trial
- Young adults with PIMD Polyhandicap in pediatric settings a situation more complex than problematic.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Care trajectories in children with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities/polyhandicap: a cross-sectional study of the French National Cohort.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Burnout among French healthcare workers caring for individuals with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities/polyhandicap: a complementary cross-sectional and longitudinal study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Observational
- Impact of caring for patients with polyhandicap on institutional health care workers' quality of life: a cross-sectional and longitudinal evaluation.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Polyhandicap is characterized by a combination of profound intellectual disability and serious motor deficit, resulting in the extreme restriction of autonomy and communication. The aim of the EVAL-PLH (EVALuation PoLyHandicap) study is to identify the impact of socioeconomic, environmental, and epidemiological determinants on the health status of the persons with polyhandicap and the daily lives of their caregivers. EVAL-PLH is a prospective cohort study. The study involved persons with severe polyhandicap (who were cared for at reeducation centers, residential facilities, and one specialized pediatric/neurological department of a university hospital), their familial caregivers and the institutional caregivers. Data collection included sociodemographics, heath status, and psychocomportemental information. Data have been collected at 2 points (2015-2016 and 2020-2021). The French EVAL-PLH cohort is the first cohort study focusing on persons with polyhandicap, their families, and the health care workers caring for them. The sustainability of the device is essential to assist patients, families, clinicians, and health decision-making authorities in the optimization of care management.
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.