ReviewFrontiers in neurology2023
Addressing mood and fatigue in return-to-work programmes after stroke: a systematic review.
Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors associated with return to work in young and middle-aged stroke survivors: a prospective cohort study with a focus on psychological resilience.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Poststroke anxiety and depression: epidemiology, mechanisms, and management strategies.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Network analysis of mutuality and depression symptoms in stroke survivors in China.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Professional reintegration of stroke survivors and their mental health, quality of life and community integration.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Return-to-work is a key rehabilitation goal for many working aged stroke survivors, promoting an overall improvement of quality of life, social integration, and emotional wellbeing. Conversely, the failure to return-to-work contributes to a loss of identity, lowered self-esteem, social isolation, poorer quality of life and health outcomes. Return-to-work programmes have largely focused on physical and vocational rehabilitation, while neglecting to include mood and fatigue management. This is despite the knowledge that stroke results in changes in physical, cognitive, and emotional functioning, which all impact one's ability to return to work. The purpose of this systematic review is to conduct a comprehensive and up-to-date search of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of return-to-work programmes after stroke. The focus is especially on examining components of mood and fatigue if they were included, and to also report on the screening tools used to measure mood and fatigue. Method: Searches were performed using 7 electronic databases for RCTs published in English from inception to 4 January 2023. A narrative synthesis of intervention design and outcomes was provided. Results: The search yielded 5 RCTs that satisfied the selection criteria ( Conclusion: Overall, the findings demonstrated that mood and fatigue are poorly addressed in rehabilitation programmes aimed at improving return-to-work after stroke, despite being a significant predictor of return-to-work. There is limited and inconsistent use of mood and fatigue screening tools. The findings were generally able to provide guidance and recommendations in the development of a stroke rehabilitation programme for return-to-work, highlighting the need to include components addressing and measuring psychological support and fatigue 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.