ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Reframing Rehabilitation Retention in Long-Term Conditions: A Theory-Informed Mini-Review of Psychological Adaptation and Engagement.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 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
Rehabilitation in long-term conditions requires not only clinical capacity but also sustained patient engagement, yet retention is commonly reduced to crude completion metrics. This theory-informed conceptual mini-review used a purposive, non-systematic synthesis of literature identified from the authors' existing knowledge base, targeted PubMed/MEDLINE searches last updated on 9 August 2026, and backward reference checking; the final article cites 76 sources. Retention is reframed as six related phases comprising referral and eligibility, uptake or initiation, early attendance, ongoing attendance or dose, completion or planned discharge, and post-program maintenance, while time to dropout is treated as a longitudinal metric. Across these phases, disengagement may reflect interactions among clinical severity, symptom interpretation, illness beliefs, distress, motivational climate, therapeutic relationships, social context, and structural access. Four author-generated hypotheses concern psychological flexibility and acceptance, illness coherence and rehabilitation self-efficacy, autonomy-supportive care and therapeutic alliance, and social support and peer belonging. Direct evidence is concentrated in selected rehabilitation settings, whereas several stage-specific and cross-condition pathways remain theoretical extrapolations. Rehabilitation resilience is therefore proposed as a provisional interaction between patient adaptive resources and responsive care systems, not as a validated trait or a synonym for observable retention. Structural barriers may prevent participation directly, and discontinuation may be appropriate when treatment is unsafe, ineffective, burdensome, or inconsistent with informed patient goals. The framework is intended to guide prospective, condition-specific testing rather than imply causal validation or scientific consensus.
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.