ArticleClinical rehabilitation2025
Priorities for post-stroke aphasia service development: Prioritisation phase of an experience-based co-design study.
Article in Clinical rehabilitation, 2025. 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.
- A global multilingual cocreation of aphasia priority topics through patient and public involvement.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Overcoming barriers and embedding processes to sustainably deliver high-dose post-stroke aphasia rehabilitation: a mixed methods longitudinal process evaluation.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Bridging the digital divide for people with aphasia: a study protocol for codesigning web accessibility tools and guidelines.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Co-Designing Aphasia Services: Evaluation of Involvement and Processes to Support Inclusion of People With Post Stroke Aphasia.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ObjectivePost-stroke aphasia (language impairment) has a devastating impact on quality of life and people with aphasia experience long-term unmet needs. A shared understanding of the experiences underpinning these unmet needs is required to identify priorities for improvement. Establishing priorities for meaningful service improvement requires involvement of service users and providers. Therefore, this research aimed to: (1) collaboratively identify priorities for aphasia service improvement according to people with aphasia, significant others, speech pathologists, and (2) co-design a plan for service development and improvement.DesignPrioritisation phase of an experience-based co-design project. Online surveys were used to prioritise ideas (
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.