ArticleToxins2026
Aligning Minds in Spasticity Care-A Two-Phase Delphi-Dialogue Study of Patients and Professionals in Spain.
Article in Toxins, 2026. 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.
- Translating Patient-Professional Divergence into Care-Improvement Priorities in Pelvic Floor Rehabilitation: A Delphi-Dialogue Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundSpasticity, which occurs with certain neurological conditions, substantially affects quality of life, function, and social participation. Despite widespread botulinum toxin use, variability persists in patient information, access to specialized rehabilitation, and follow-up models.
methodsThis two-phase Delphi-Dialogue Patients-Professionals study (DDPP), promoted by SERMEF, integrated perspectives from 77 patients and 141 rehabilitation professionals. Phase 1 used parallel surveys to assess satisfaction, perceived effectiveness of botulinum toxin, communication preferences, and rehabilitation follow-up. Phase 2 applied Real-Time Delphi with 38 experts to generate consensus recommendations to improve spasticity management.
resultsPatients and professionals agreed on botulinum toxin benefits, the importance of ongoing rehabilitation, and the value of hybrid (in-person/remote) follow-up. Key gaps concerned access to Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation services, clarity and timing of information, and shared goal setting. Experts translated these misalignments into 10 prioritized recommendations, with highest feasibility for actions standardizing access pathways, optimizing botulinum toxin use, reinforcing structured education, and consolidating hybrid rehabilitation models.
conclusionsThe DDPP approach offers a reproducible framework to align stakeholder perspectives by converting quantified divergence into consensus-based innovation priorities. Implementing the recommendations-particularly those strengthening communication, education, and hybrid pathways regarding botulinum toxin treatment-may support more accessible, personalized, patient-centered spasticity care.
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.