ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
Post-Acute Rehabilitation Placement After Acute Ischemic Stroke Is Associated With Non-Clinical Factors Despite Similar Clinical Profiles.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Discharge destination after acute ischemic stroke has implications for functional recovery and healthcare costs. Individuals discharged to inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs) achieve better outcomes than those discharged to skilled nursing facilities (SNFs); however, many patients discharged to IRFs and SNFs have similar clinical profiles. We examined non-clinical factors associated with discharge location after acute ischemic stroke. Methods: Population: 236 adults hospitalized with acute ischemic stroke, living independently in the community prior to admission, and discharged to either an IRF (n=171) or SNF (n=65). Clinical variables: NIHSS, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), acute care length of stay (LOS), functional status (AM-PAC "6-Clicks"), and neglect. Non-clinical variables: age, sex, race, marital status, insurance, home layout, living status, and available assistance. Associations with discharge location were evaluated using univariable and multivariable logistic regression and reported as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Individuals discharged to IRFs were younger, more likely to cohabitate, and had shorter LOS than those discharged to SNFs. Functional status (AM-PAC) and comorbidity burden (CCI) did not differ significantly between groups despite differences in discharge destination. In univariable models, younger age, cohabitating marital status, living with family, available assistance, shorter LOS, private insurance, and higher NIHSS were associated with greater odds of IRF discharge. In multivariable analysis, younger age (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.91-0.98), cohabitating marital status (OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.13-5.48), and shorter LOS (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.82-0.93) remained independently associated with IRF discharge. Conclusions: Individuals with comparable pre-stroke independence and similar clinical severity, discharge to IRF versus SNF was independently associated with non-clinical factors; age, marital status, and LOS, whereas stroke severity and functional status were not significant predictors. These findings underscore the importance of evidence-informed discharge criteria integrating clinical indicators and social context to support equitable access to intensive rehabilitation after stroke.
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.