ReviewBMC health services research2022
Interventions for adults with deafblindness - an integrative review.
Review in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compile the current research on interventions for rehabilitation aimed at adults (aged 18-65 years) with deafblindness. MATERIALS AND
methodsA comprehensive search was conducted in eight databases. An additional manual search was also carried out. A total of 7049 unique references were initially identified, and after screening, 28 original scientific articles were included. The results from these articles were categorized based on limiting consequences of deafblindness: communication, orientation and to move around freely and safely and access to information, as well as to psychological adaptation to deafblindness.
resultsFourteen of the included articles had their main focus on access to communication, ten on orientation and the ability to move around feely and safely, three on the opportunity to gain access to information, and one related to psychological adaptation to deafblindness. Most articles focused on technical devices, of which one-third were single case studies.
conclusionThere is a limited number of evaluated interventions for people with deafblindness. Most of the existing studies involved one to five participants with deafblindness, and only few studies involved a larger number of participants. More research with a larger number of participants are needed, which could be facilitated by international cooperation between practitioners and researchers.
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.