Observational studyJournal of rehabilitation medicine2025
Optimizing the clinical functioning information tool (ClinFIT) in routine clinical practice: development of functional staging cutoff scores for rehabilitation provision and intensity.
Observational study in Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 2025. 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.
- Can functioning scores guide rehabilitation referral in primary care? Extending ClinFIT to the community level.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Clinical Functioning Information Tool (ClinFIT) in Colorectal Surgical Prehabilitation: A Prospective Observational Study.Advances in rehabilitation science and practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo develop data-driven functional staging cutoff scores for the Clinical Functioning Information Tool (ClinFIT) total raw score to stratify patients according to rehabilitation provision and intensity.
methodsThis observational study included adult inpatients (n = 270) admitted to a tertiary rehabilitation unit. ClinFIT total scores at admission were analysed alongside the Therapy Disciplines domain of the Rehabilitation Complexity Scale to represent rehabilitation intensity. Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis was used to identify optimal cutoff points distinguishing between levels of rehabilitation intensity. Subgroup analyses were conducted by age, sex, and diagnosis.
resultsParticipants were predominantly male (54.1%), with a mean age of 62.9 ± 14.3 years. ClinFIT total raw scores improved significantly across all health conditions at discharge compared with admission (p < 0.001), reflecting substantial functional recovery during inpatient rehabilitation. Two ClinFIT total score cutoffs were identified: 135 (light vs moderate) and 192 (moderate vs high intensity), with acceptable discriminatory performance (AUCs: 0.720, 0.748, respectively). Subgroup analyses supported the robustness of this 3-level staging system across demographic and diagnostic groups.
conclusionThis study provides evidence-based cutoff scores for ClinFIT, supporting its clinical use for stratifying rehabilitation provision and intensity. These findings may enhance clinical decision-making, optimize resource allocation, and promote wider adoption of the ClinFIT. Further validation in external and diverse populations is warranted.
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.