ArticlePeerJ2026
Post-discharge outcome measurement tools in occupational therapy for people with acquired brain injury in Japan: a scoping review.
Article in PeerJ, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Purpose: Outcome measurement is fundamental to rehabilitation practice; however, the tools commonly used in occupational therapy after Acquired Brain Injury (ABI) may not adequately capture the complex needs of individuals living in the community. This scoping review synthesised the outcome measures employed in post-discharge occupational therapy in Japan and identified the core concepts they assess. Method: A comprehensive search of nine databases was conducted without restrictions on publication year or language. Search strategies were developed using relevant keywords, and four independent reviewers applied predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria to ensure methodological rigour. Results: Of the 1,188 abstracts screened, 985 articles were excluded, leaving 104 for full-text review. Ultimately, 44 studies met the eligibility criteria, yielding 32 distinct outcome measures. The Functional Independence Measure (FIM) (29.5%) was most frequently applied, followed by the Frenchay Activities Index (FAI) (9.0%), the Life Space Assessment (LSA) (7.7%), and the Barthel Index (BI) (7.7%). Categorisation of the 11 most frequently used tools according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) revealed a strong emphasis on mobility (26%) and self-care (18%). Discussion: These findings reflect both the influence of Japan's ageing population on assessment priorities and a critical gap in which participation, cognition, and broader psychosocial outcomes remain underrepresented. Broader and more comprehensive assessment strategies are required to address the diverse realities of community life following ABI.
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.