GuidelineJournal of pediatric rehabilitation medicine2026
A national consensus-based framework on preferred assessments and interventions in current treatment for young people with acquired brain injury in Dutch rehabilitation centers.
Guideline in Journal of pediatric rehabilitation medicine, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAcquired brain injury (ABI) is prevalent among young people (4-25 years). When ABI-related problems persist, treatment in a rehabilitation center (RC) may be indicated. However, there is wide variability regarding the delivery of care across Dutch RCs, including assessments, interventions, and psychoeducational (PE) materials. The aim was to create a consensus-based framework with preferred assessments, interventions, and PE-materials to be used in pediatric ABI rehabilitation. A national framework could optimize the delivery of comparable care for this population.
methodsFor this three-round Delphi study, healthcare professionals (physiatrists, psychologists, social workers, physical/occupational/speech/language therapists) from RCs providing care for young people with ABI were invited to participate. In the first two (online) rounds, currently used assessments/interventions/PE-materials were collected, stepwise-prioritized, subsequently listed per discipline, and classified per International Classification of Functioning (ICF) domain. Results from rounds one/two were discussed in a consensus meeting (in person), aiming to reach agreement on assessments/interventions/PE-materials in the national framework and how to use them in current practice.
resultsSeventy-four healthcare professionals from 12 RCs participated. After Delphi round one, 163 assessments, 39 interventions, and 64 PE-materials were collected. After round two, the selection was narrowed down to n = 51/n = 34/n = 28, respectively. After round three, consensus was reached on 37 assessments, 25 interventions (divided over all disciplines/classified per ICF domain), 27 PE-materials, as well as on the use of the framework by all participating RC to enhance clinical reasoning in current practice.
conclusionA consensus-based national framework in ABI rehabilitation has been developed and is now available to optimize the delivery of care for young people with ABI across Dutch RCs.
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.