ArticleBMJ open2026
Chronic stroke rehabilitation interventions in primary healthcare settings: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open, 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
objectivesThis scoping review intended to map the existing literature on chronic stroke rehabilitation interventions in primary healthcare (PHC) settings, with a particular focus on intervention dosage-frequency, intensity, type and duration-as well as the mode of delivery, which encompasses intervention location, format and provider.
designA scoping review was conducted following the guidelines outlined in the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive search of 16 databases was conducted on the EBSCOhost platform on 10 February 2022. A supplementary Google search was conducted to identify grey literature up to 19 November 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Sources published in English between 2010 and 2022 with full-text availability, addressing interventions for chronic stroke survivors delivered by various stakeholders in PHC, community or home-based settings. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently screened the identified sources to determine eligibility for inclusion. Data were extracted independently, compared between reviewers, analysed and synthesised narratively with descriptive statistics.
resultsIn total 34 sources are included in the review, with most (n=28) originating from high-income countries. Interventions predominantly targeted the body function and structure component of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health framework (n=29) through physical exercise (n=21). However, few interventions addressed the activity (n=17) and participation (n=11) components. Contextual factors (n=9) were seldom considered in intervention design. Intervention dosage varied widely. Most interventions were delivered by the multidisciplinary team (n=9) and were provided either at home (n=16) or in the community (n=13). Individual sessions (n=18) were more commonly offered than group sessions (n=8).
conclusionsThe optimal dosage for chronic stroke interventions remains uncertain, and current interventions, along with their modes of delivery, are often misaligned with PHC settings. Further research is essential to establish best practices in both well-resourced and under-resourced environments to address the current evidence gap and to enable the development of effective rehabilitation protocols that meet the needs of chronic stroke survivors and their families in PHC settings.
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.