ArticleBMJ open2025
Experiences and views of conversations about recovery and prognosis on the stroke unit: findings from semistructured interviews with professionals.
Article in BMJ open, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesProviding information about the process of poststroke recovery, and individuals' likely outlook can be challenging for professionals, which may lead to avoidance of this important issue, leaving patients' and carers' needs unmet in relation to understanding their recovery. We aimed to understand professionals' experiences and views of providing information about recovery in stroke units.
designSemistructured interviews were conducted as part of a wider ethnographic case study. A Framework approach to analysis was employed.
settingTwo UK stroke units.
participants19 qualified stroke unit professionals with a range of experience levels participated, including doctors, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, speech and language therapists and a nurse.
resultsThree themes and seven subthemes were generated. Participants across disciplines perceived that discussing recovery could have important benefits, although many lacked guidance about their roles in this domain. Skills in predicting recovery and sharing these predictions were learnt experientially, and therapists reported a lack of preparatory training and confidence, resulting in perceptions of mixed experiences for patients. Many professionals were worried about the consequences of sharing personalised predictions, including the impact on patients' hope and motivation, and their ability to manage patients' and families' emotional responses. These concerns could result in professionals experiencing negative psychological consequences, for which limited formal support was available.
conclusionsStroke unit professionals perceive that providing information about recovery, including individualised predictions, to patients and carers has important benefits; however, they require additional guidance, support and training to confidently engage in this important area of clinical practice.
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.