ArticleBMJ open2026
Unmet needs for stroke patients based on the social ecological model: protocol for a mixed-methods systematic 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionStroke is a severe cerebrovascular disease characterised by high morbidity, high recurrence rate, high disability rate, high mortality rate and significant economic burden. The unmet needs of stroke patients are universal and diverse and closely related to their health outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol describes a mixed-methods systematic review to identify unmet needs in stroke patients. A comprehensive search will be performed in the following databases: PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, CNKI, Wanfang Database and CQVIP. Google Scholar and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global were searched as grey literature sources. The search will target studies published in English or Chinese between January 2018 and April 2026. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods study designs will be included. Two independent reviewers will conduct the selection process and cross-check the data extraction. The Mixed-Methods Assessment Tool (2018 version) will be employed to evaluate study quality. The convergent integrated approach and thematic synthesis will be used to synthesise and map extracted data to the social ecological model. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (GRADE-CERQual) approach will be used for the certainty assessment of evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this systematic review, as it will use data extracted exclusively from published studies and other publicly available sources. The findings of this review will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at relevant academic and clinical conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420261366175.
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.