ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2023
Development of the INpaTiEnt Rehabilitation App Compliance QuesTionnaire [INTERACT].
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe elements of previously designed questionnaires do not take into consideration the burdens encountered in an inpatient hospital setting. The purpose of this study is to validate elements of a non-compliance survey in an in-hospital setting and discuss aspects of compliance with telerehabilitative physiotherapy in the early postoperative period.
methodsA literature search was conducted to identify elements that prevent patients from performing their prescribed physical therapy exercises. These items were then evaluated by the expert review technique as described by Ikart. Afterwards, the synthesized survey was handed out to patients for the assessment of the quality of its items.
resultsThe results of the expert review technique identified some conceptual and grammatical problems. This led to the adjustment of some of the elements. The quality of the resulting questionnaire was deemed to be good, as patients were able to fully understand the concepts and answer accordingly. A statistical analysis was conducted to evaluate the responses.
conclusionsThe items of this second questionnaire have proven to be reliable to assess the compliance of patients in an in-hospital setting. These items will be added to the cross-culturally adapted items of a previous questionnaire.
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.