ArticleJMIR human factors2025
The Significance of a Cerebrovascular Accident Outcome Prediction Model for Patients, Family Members, and Health Care Professionals: Qualitative Evaluation Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2025. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with cerebrovascular accident (CVA) should be involved in setting their rehabilitation goals. A personalized prediction of CVA outcomes would allow care professionals to better inform patients and informal caregivers. Several accurate prediction models have been created, but acceptance and proper implementation of the models are prerequisites for model adoption.
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the added value of a prediction model for long-term outcomes of rehabilitation after CVA and evaluate how it can best be displayed, implemented, and integrated into the care process.
methodsWe designed a mock-up version, including visualizations, based on our recently developed prediction model. We conducted focus groups with CVA patients and informal caregivers, and separate focus groups with health care professionals (HCPs). Their opinions on the current information management and the model were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. Lastly, a Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations (MIDI) questionnaire was used to collect insights into the prediction model and visualizations with HCPs.
resultsThe analysis of 6 focus groups, with 9 patients, 4 informal caregivers, and 8 HCPs, resulted in 10 themes in 3 categories: evaluation of the current care process (information absorption, expectations of rehabilitation, prediction of outcomes, and decision aid), content of the prediction model (reliability, relevance, and influence on the care process), and accessibility of the model (ease of understanding, model type preference, and moment of use). We extracted recommendations for the prediction model and visualizations. The results of the questionnaire survey (9 responses, 56% response rate) underscored the themes of the focus groups.
conclusionsThere is a need for the use of a prediction model to assess CVA outcomes, as indicated by the general approval of participants in both the focus groups and the questionnaire survey. We recommend that the prediction model be geared toward HCPs, as they can provide the context necessary for patients and informal caregivers. Good reliability and relevance of the prediction model will be essential for its wide adoption.
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.