ArticleHERD2022
Stroke Patients' Free-Time Activities and Spatial Preferences During Inpatient Recovery in Rehabilitation Centers.
Article in HERD, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Ending the single versus multi-bedroom debate: Hybrid rooms meet stroke rehabilitation needs.PloS one · 2026Article
- Article
- Economic Argument for Innovative Design From Valuing Patient-Centered Stroke Rehabilitation.HERD · 2025Article
- Shadowing Stroke Patients to Explore the Rehabilitation Built Environment: Approach, Insights, and Lessons Learned.Qualitative health research · 2025Article
- Building support for children and families affected by stroke (BUILD CARE): Study protocol.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- The initiator of neuroexcitotoxicity and ferroptosis in ischemic stroke: Glutamate accumulation.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2023Review
- The role of the physical environment in stroke recovery: Evidence-based design principles from a mixed-methods multiple case study.PloS one · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate which spaces stroke patients visit in their free time while undergoing inpatient recovery in rehabilitation centers, what activities they engage in, and what kind of spaces they want.
backgroundResearch studies consistently show that stroke patients are highly inactive during rehabilitation. Much remains unknown about what patients do in their free time and how the built environment might affect their behavior and activities.
methodsPatients' free-time activities were recorded via patient shadowing (
resultsSix main themes emerged from the analysis of shadowing data and patient surveys: (1) spending most free time in their room, (2) corridor as the overlooked activity hub, (3) food and beverage stations as triggers of activity, (4) wanting to socialize, (5) variety of common spaces for different activities is desired, and (6) common room's atmosphere, comfort, style, and view are important. Even though socializing with other patients was mentioned as a primary reason for visiting common spaces in the survey, patients spent most of their free time alone.
conclusionsCorridor emerged as a space with great potential to motivate and support various activities of patients. Patients' free-time activities could contribute to their recovery, and the built environment may play a role in facilitating and supporting these activities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.