ArticleRehabilitation psychology2026
Patient engagement in inpatient rehabilitation: A scoping review of measures and evolving conceptualizations.
Article in Rehabilitation psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From information to action- a phase-based analysis of patient engagement in inpatient fall prevention: A scoping review.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2026Review
- Development, Reliability and Validity of Engagement in Exercise Rehabilitation Scale for Patients with Stroke.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Article
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
Abstract
objectiveThis scoping review aims to describe measures of patient engagement in acute inpatient rehabilitation settings, measurement approaches, and conceptualizations of patient engagement.
methodFollowing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines and the Joanna Briggs Scoping Review Framework, we searched seven databases-PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, Scopus, and PsycInfo-from inception to May 2024. Inclusion criteria included (a) participants aged 18 or older; (b) conducted in a hospital-based acute inpatient rehabilitation program irrespective of diagnosis; (c) measured patient engagement during rehabilitation; and (d) published in English. Major search concepts included patient engagement, measures, rehabilitation, and inpatient rehabilitation settings. Two independent reviewers assessed eligibility and extracted data, resolving conflicts through consultation with a third reviewer. The initial search identified 8,320 records.
resultsOf the 384 studies that underwent full-text review, 37 met inclusion criteria and reported on 10 engagement measures. The Pittsburgh Rehabilitation Participation Scale was the most frequently used, followed by therapy dosage and the Hopkins Rehabilitation Engagement Rating Scale. Most studies used an observer-rated approach. Conceptualizations of engagement varied in depth and integration of theoretical models. Although motivation was a central theme, conceptualizations have evolved, recognizing multiple factors influencing engagement.
conclusionThe lack of consensus on measuring and conceptualizing patient engagement limits efforts to advance research and clinical practices to improve engagement and, ultimately, outcomes in rehabilitation. Future research could explore the clinical utility of existing measures and establish patient-centered best practices for measurement. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
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.