ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2025
Transforming Community-Based Rehabilitation Services: A National Redesign Using Experience-Based Co-Design.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An Age-Adapted Co-Design Methodology for Community Health Research Involving Older Adults With Type 2 Diabetes.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo understand the experiences of clients, caregivers and staff in community day rehabilitation centres (DRCs) and identify areas for improvement in service processes and the clinical care of stroke, frailty and hip fracture, a national quality improvement project was undertaken using experience-based co-design (EBCD). The goal was to prioritise and co-design system-level changes for community-based rehabilitation care in Singapore.
methodsThe EBCD methodology comprised of eight stages: (1) site observations/time-motion studies, (2) interviews, (3) development of trigger film, (4) staff feedback events, (5) client/caregiver feedback events, (6) joint workshop, (7) small co-design groups and (8) celebration event. In addition, we collected surveys and case note reviews to capture the perceived and actual delivery of guideline-based care for stroke, frailty and hip fracture.
resultsOver a period of 2.6 years, we engaged over 80 clients and caregivers and 250 staff from 20 DRCs in the EBCD process. Triangulation of data from the site observations, interviews, surveys and case note reviews identified four themes: (1) Best practice care, (2) Person-centred care, (3) Allied health professional needs and (4) Service design. Person-centred care was desired by clients, caregivers and staff but was sometimes hindered by factors like tight scheduling and high turnover. Care was partially aligned with international guidelines, though some strongly recommended interventions were inconsistently delivered. Staff interviews and site observations revealed potential for more direct client care, teaching, research and quality improvement, with fewer administrative duties. New care models were sought, including social connections beyond DRCs, clearer maintenance rehabilitation criteria and financial incentives for transitioning to maintenance rehabilitation. A 12-min trigger film based on client/caregiver interviews was used during the feedback events and workshops. Three co-design workgroups were formed to develop clinical practice guidelines for stroke rehabilitation, a workplace learning framework for allied health, and community rehabilitation recommendations.
conclusionEBCD was successfully used to identify gaps and co-design system-level solutions to improve community-based rehabilitation care in Singapore. Further solutions at the organisational and individual levels are needed. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Our study used EBCD to actively involve clients, caregivers and healthcare staff. Clients with lived experience of stroke, frailty and hip fracture identified key priorities and contributed to qualitative data interpretation during the feedback event. Notably, a trigger film incorporating clients' and caregivers' experiences of community rehabilitation services was developed and verified for accuracy during the feedback event, before being played at the joint workshop for all. During the joint workshop, priority statements for discussion were collaboratively identified, and solutions were co-developed. Clients and caregivers subsequently contributed to the development of the clinical practice guidelines for stroke rehabilitation. Throughout the project, the insights from clients and caregivers helped to ensure that our study's findings were relevant and actionable. We acknowledge the invaluable role of our patient and public partners in shaping this study and driving meaningful healthcare improvements.
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.