Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36188787›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2021

Rehabilitation Evidence-Based Decision-Making: The READ Model.

Iona Novak, Anna Te Velde, Ashleigh Hines, Emma Stanton, Maria Mc Namara, Madison C B Paton, Megan Finch-Edmondson, Catherine Morgan

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
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

8 authors.

Iona NovakFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Anna Te VeldeSpecialty of Child and Adolescent Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney Medical School, The Cerebral Palsy Alliance Research Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Ashleigh HinesSpecialty of Child and Adolescent Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney Medical School, The Cerebral Palsy Alliance Research Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Emma StantonSpecialty of Child and Adolescent Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney Medical School, The Cerebral Palsy Alliance Research Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Maria Mc NamaraSpecialty of Child and Adolescent Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney Medical School, The Cerebral Palsy Alliance Research Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Madison C B PatonSpecialty of Child and Adolescent Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney Medical School, The Cerebral Palsy Alliance Research Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Megan Finch-EdmondsonSpecialty of Child and Adolescent Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney Medical School, The Cerebral Palsy Alliance Research Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Catherine MorganSpecialty of Child and Adolescent Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney Medical School, The Cerebral Palsy Alliance Research Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evidence-based practice is the foundation of rehabilitation for maximizing client outcomes. However, an unacceptably high number of ineffective or outdated interventions are still implemented, leading to sub-optimal outcomes for clients. This paper proposes the Rehabilitation Evidence bAsed Decision-Making (READ) Model, a decision-making algorithm for evidence-based decision-making in rehabilitation settings. The READ Model outlines a step-by-step layered process for healthcare professionals to collaboratively set goals, and to select appropriate interventions. The READ Model acknowledges the important multi-layered contributions of client's preferences and values, family supports available, and external environmental factors such as funding, availability of services and access. Healthcare professionals can apply the READ Model to choose interventions that are evidence-based, with an appropriate mode, dose, and with regular review, in order to achieve client's goals. Two case studies are used to demonstrate application of the READ Model: cerebral palsy and autism spectrum disorder. The READ Model applies the four central principles of evidence-based practice and can be applied across multiple rehabilitation settings.

Indexed as

decision-makingevidence-basedgoal-settingREAD modelrehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID36188787
PMCPMC9397823

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.