ArticleEuropean geriatric medicine2025
International Delphi study on terminology, organisation and outcomes of geriatric rehabilitation for older people living at home.
Article in European geriatric medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Geriatric rehabilitation in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland (DACH region): a current state analysis.European geriatric medicine · 2026Article
- Requirements for the scale up of a geriatric aftercare program: a qualitative interview study with stakeholders - findings from the GeRas project.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Exploring cost trajectories of patients admitted to geriatric rehabilitation in the Netherlands.Age and ageing · 2026Article
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
purposeInternationally, many differences are observed regarding the practice of geriatric rehabilitation for older people living at home. To improve international collaboration and research on this topic, we aimed to reach a consensus on terminology, organisational aspects, and outcome domains to focus on.
methodsWe conducted a three-round online Delphi study among 60 (Home-based) geriatric rehabilitation experts from 14 countries. In the first round, we collected diverse perspectives and input through statements and questions. In the subsequent rounds, participants rated statements on a 5-point Likert scale. Each statement could be accompanied by written feedback. After each round, results were presented anonymously to the participants, and statements on which no consensus was reached were rephrased. Consensus was defined as 70% or more participants (fully) agreeing with a statement.
resultsSixty, 52, and 46 experts completed rounds 1, 2 and 3, respectively. After two rounds, we reached a consensus on ten statements and on the remaining four in the last round. A consensus was reached on the terminology used (i.e., home-based geriatric rehabilitation) and on several organisational aspects (e.g., essential aspects to consider for starting home-based geriatric rehabilitation and the importance of a knowledgeable case manager). Lastly, experts agreed that participation and activity are the most important outcome domains to focus on.
conclusionsThrough an international Delphi study, we reached consensus on various important aspects of home-based geriatric rehabilitation. These outcomes provide a basis for further development of this emerging field.
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.