ArticleThe Australian journal of rural health2025
Community Rehabilitation for Rural and Remote Australia: Measuring What Matters Based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF): A Scoping Review.
Article in The Australian journal of rural health, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo review the quantitative outcome measures that have been used to evaluate community rehabilitation services delivered across rural and remote Australia.
designA scoping review was completed and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for Scoping Reviews.
methodsPeer-reviewed, original research published between January 2010-September 2023 was searched using MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane database, Joanna Briggs Library, PsychINFO, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Studies were selected if they involved allied health outpatient, subacute or nonacute services for Australian rural or remote dwelling populations. Participants were required to have an underlying impairment. Face-to-face or telehealth delivery in a rural and remote location was included. Measures were identified and then mapped to the ICF domains of activity and participation, as well as quality of life.
resultsA total of 27 studies were included that yielded 40 different outcome measures of activity, participation and/or quality of life. Few measures, however, were used consistently across studies, and even fewer demonstrated a significant change across more than one study. Most studies evaluated single interventions, and few studies evaluated the service model as a whole.
conclusionTo ensure robust evaluation of community rehabilitation services in rural and remote Australia, a core data set and common framework for evaluation of community rehabilitation services is required. The evaluation framework must ensure consistency in measurement that reflects rural and remote service models and takes into account the environment in which services are delivered.
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.