Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40336788›Full record

ReviewThe British journal of occupational therapy2022

Effective interventions within the scope of occupational therapy practice to address participation for adults with aphasia: A systematic review.

Anne A Escher, Sarah McKinnon, Sue Berger

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The British journal of occupational therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Anne A EscherDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Sarah McKinnonPost-Professional OTD Program, Department of Occupational Therapy, MGH Institute of Health Professions, Boston, MA, USA.
Sue BergerDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Occupational therapists work with clients with impaired communication to re-engage in valued occupations. This systematic review seeks to answer the question: What are effective interventions within the scope of occupational therapy practice to address participation for adults with aphasia? Method: A systematic review of the literature was completed using PubMed, PsychInfo, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and OT Seeker databases. Intervention studies within the scope of occupational therapy practice with a participation outcome, and published in peer reviewed journals from 2000 to 2019, were included. The quality of each study was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Findings: Thirteen articles fit the inclusion criteria. Categories of interventions that emerged from the data include community-based groups, individually tailored programs, adaptation/presentation of materials, interprofessional interventions, and psychoeducation. Conclusion: There is evidence to support the use of interventions within the scope of occupational therapy practice to increase participation for people with aphasia. Specifically, the use of community-based groups and adaptation of materials are effective to facilitate participation. Most of the studies were pre-post one group design; however, they demonstrated positive results for participation outcomes. More research is needed on people with aphasia that focuses on participation in meaningful occupations.

Indexed as

Acquired communication impairmentcommunication managementleisure participationrehabilitationsocial participationstroke

Identifiers

PMID40336788
PMCPMC12033760

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.