ArticleBMC health services research2025
Client characteristics and outcomes of the Australian short-term restorative care programme: a cohort study.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. 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.
- Evaluating the Modified Barthel Index for Policy and Practice in Reablement: Lessons From Australia's Short-Term Restorative Care Program.Australasian journal on ageing · 2026Article
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
backgroundRestorative care is a goal-oriented, time-limited, multidisciplinary approach to address functional decline in older adults. Within Australia, one form of restorative care available to community-dwelling older adults is the Short-Term Restorative Care (STRC) Programme. Australian government expenditure on such services is high, yet research on programme outcomes is scarce. The primary aim of this study was to provide a descriptive analysis of STRC participant and outcome data from clients' first STRC episode with a large, aged care provider in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Secondary aims were: (i) examine any associations between client demographic and outcome measures routinely collected, and (ii) consider the suitability for broader sector use of the clinical and outcome measures routinely collected by the provider.
methodsA retrospective, cohort study of STRC client data routinely collected between 1 March 2021 and 28 February 2023 from a large, not-for-profit aged care provider in NSW, Australia. Client demographic data and routinely used clinical and outcome measures (modified Barthel Index, Mini Nutritional Assessment short form, Clinical Frailty Scale, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 10-Question short form - global health, and Goal Attainment Scale light) were collected. Descriptive and inferential analyses were completed to explore available data.
resultsFour hundred and eighty-four STRC clients were included in this study. The mean age of clients was 81.5 (7.6) and majority were female (56%), born in Australia (49%), had a normal nutritional status on entry (54%), and classified as either pre-frail or mildly frail on entry (66%). The modified Barthel Index, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 10-Question short form - global health, and Goal Attainment Scale light all showed statistically significant improvements. Almost all clients remaining in their own home after exit of the STRC Programme (99%).
conclusionsThis study looked at detailed data from the STRC Programme in Australia with a large sample over multiple years from a single aged care provider, and the findings suggest it is an effective program for older adults. The data provide insights into different clinical and outcome measures used, identify those that work well with this population, and those that need further consideration.
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.