ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024
Study protocol for a nested process evaluation of a complex discharge planning intervention (HOME Rehab) to improve participation after first-stroke.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. 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.
- Transitional care interventions and outcome measures in stroke rehabilitation: a scoping review.Disability and rehabilitation · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Stroke is a leading cause of adult disability, and the transition from hospital to home can be fraught with challenges. The HOME Rehab trial is designed to address if better health outcomes for stroke survivors can be achieved with a contextually relevant and tailored occupational therapy discharge planning and support intervention. Process evaluations inform clinical trial findings and future scale up, as well as how to implement a successful intervention effectively into policy and practice. This paper describes the protocol we are using in the HOME Rehab process evaluation planning and activities. Methods: Using a theoretically informed approach, mixed methods are being used to collect data and address all aspects of the RE-AIM framework. Quantitative data will comprise clinician surveys, trial logs and fidelity checklists as well as screening and recruitment numbers. Semi-structured interviews with trial participants and carers and focus groups with occupational therapists will provide qualitative data. A concurrent triangulation approach will be taken to draw on the strengths of multiple methods to cross-validate findings. The RE-AIM framework will be used to interpret the qualitative and quantitative data together as well as highlight areas of convergence or divergence in the findings. Multiple data sources will be integrated to refine the interpretation of outcomes, understand the context of program delivery, and identify key findings. Drawing on, and integrating data from, multiple perspectives and methods will strengthen the overall findings and provided detailed insights into the causal mechanisms as well as the contextual factors that may influence intervention outcomes. Discussion: Process evaluations can optimize study outcomes by improving how a complex intervention is implemented, informing the actions of policymakers and clinicians. For the HOME Rehab intervention, the process evaluation may provide valuable data necessary to explain the trial findings, as well as inform future scale-up and implementation if the HOME Rehab intervention is shown to be effective. Clinical trial registration: https://www.anzctr.org.au, identifier ACTRN12618001360202.
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.