ArticleClinical rehabilitation2024
A programme evaluation of 'First Steps': A peer-conceived, developed and led self-management intervention for people after a Parkinson's diagnosis.
Article in Clinical rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Literature Review on the Role of Paraprofessionals in Delivering Brief Psychological Interventions.Administration and policy in mental health · 2026Review
- Empowering People with Parkinson's: Reframing Self-Management in Parkinson's-A Critical Reflection of Current Practice.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveA diagnosis of Parkinson's often leads to uncertainty about the future and loss of perceived control. Peer support may offer a means to address these concerns and promote self-management.
designA programme evaluation of the feasibility and potential effects of 'First Steps', utilising a pragmatic step wedge approach. Comparing First Steps (intervention) to (control) conditions.
resultsBetween February 2018 and July 2019, 36 participants were enrolled into intervention and 21 to control conditions, all were included in statistical analysis. Lost to follow up was n = 1 (intervention) and n = 1 adverse event was reported (control, unrelated). Of the 36 allocated to the intervention n = 22 participants completed both days of First Steps during the study period. Completion of outcome measures was >95% at 24 weeks. Small effects favouring the intervention were found for HADS (odds ratio (OR) = 2.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24:17.84), Carer Strain Index (OR = 2.22, 95% CI 0.5:9.76) and vigorous (
conclusionsFirst Steps was feasible and safe and we found potential to benefit physical activity, mental health and carer strain. Further research with longer-term follow up is warranted.
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.