ReviewArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2023
A Systematic Review of Outcomes Measured Following New Wheelchair and Seating-Prescription Interventions in Adults.
Review in Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding Urban Mobility Among Wheelchair Users: The Intersection of Physical Impairment, Wheelchair Mobility Proficiency, and Self-Efficacy in Wheeled Mobility-A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Customization of manual wheelchair components: a state-of-the-art review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Review
- Manual wheelchair training approaches and intended training outcomes for adults who are new to wheelchair use: A scoping review.Australian occupational therapy journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To determine the outcomes and outcome-measurement tools currently used during the prescription of new wheelchairs and/or seating systems. A systematic review of studies was performed to identify outcome-measurement tools. Data Sources: MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycINFO were searched from earliest available to March 2022. Study Selection: Studies were included if they focused on a new wheelchair or seating-system prescription with adults. Data Extraction: Data extraction and quality assessments were conducted by 2 reviewers; disagreements were resolved by consensus. Risk of bias was assessed using the PEDro scale (for randomized controlled trials) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (for non-randomized studies). Data Synthesis: 48 articles were included which identified 37 standardized outcome-measurement tools. Use of study-specific outcome-measurement tools was common. Wheelchair use, user satisfaction, activity, and participation were the most studied outcome domains. Commonly used standardized assessments included the QUEST 2.0, functional independence measure, WHODAS II, IPPA, and PIADS. Conclusion: Outcome measures to evaluate wheelchair and seating-system prescription vary, and the use of study-specific outcome-measurement tools is high. There is a need to choose consistent outcome measures that are reliable and valid, and deal with this complex area through ensuring carefully constructed study designs.
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.