ArticleRevista brasileira de enfermagem2026
Therapeutic support and functional disability after ischemic stroke: a cohort study.
Article in Revista brasileira de enfermagem, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesto analyze the association between the therapeutic support received and the functional disability degree between two and three years after ischemic stroke, comparing functional disability level between 90 days and two to three years after the event.
methodsof the 242 survivors followed, 155 were alive after three years. Sociodemographic and clinical instruments, a telephone protocol, and the Modified Rankin Scale were used. Data were analyzed using chi-square, Fisher's exact, and McNemar tests (α=0.05).
results62.6% presented with asymptomatic/mild dysfunction, and 37.4% with moderate to severe dysfunction. Despite functional improvement, many maintained or worsened their disability (p=0.6219). Follow-up was limited: appointments with neurologists (56.6%), physiotherapists (45.8%), nurses (15%), and secondary prophylaxis (53.6%). Individuals with greater disability had more follow-up, with significant association for physiotherapy.
conclusionsthere were gaps in therapeutic support, despite the persistence or progression of disabilities. Multidisciplinary follow-up is essential to prevent worsening and promote recovery.
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.