ReviewThe British journal of occupational therapy2022
Evaluation of the evidence for self-management post-stroke within clinical practice guidelines for people with stroke: A systematic review.
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. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stroke patients and caregivers' experiences and satisfaction with post-discharge self-management support in Ghana: A qualitative study.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Occupational therapy practice to support executive function impairment after acquired brain injury: A UK clinical survey.The British journal of occupational therapy · 2024Article
- Using Intervention Mapping and Behavior Change Techniques to Develop a Digital Intervention for Self-Management in Stroke: Development Study.JMIR human factors · 2023Article
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
Introduction: Self-management post-stroke is essential where healthcare systems are stretched and stroke prevalence remains high. Self-management is recommended in stroke guidelines however, the quality of guidelines can vary and the evidence underpinning recommendations is unclear. The objectives of this paper are to identify and appraise current stroke guidelines, synthesise self-management recommendations and assess the evidentiary basis of these recommendations. Method: Stroke guidelines were retrieved from a search of four databases and stroke association websites in July 2021. Four independent reviewers assessed their quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation 2nd Edition instrument. Self-management recommendations were extracted by hand, evaluated, synthesised and the evidence underpinning them appraised using the Canadian Stroke Best Practice Recommendations framework. Results: Eleven guidelines were included in this systematic review, all of excellent methodological quality overall. One hundred and sixty-one recommendations were extracted from these guidelines and grouped into ten principles of self-management. A quarter of the recommendations were underpinned by level A evidence, 32% level B and 43% level C. Conclusion: Although current stroke guidelines are of high methodological quality, there are considerable inconsistencies in self-management recommendations within and between these guidelines, with varying strengths of underpinning evidence. This article identifies a need for universal consensus regarding evidence-based self-management post-stroke.
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.