ArticleMedicine2025
The application of the IMB model combined with feedback-based health education in the rehabilitation of limb function in stroke patients.
Article in Medicine, 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.
- Nutritional literacy in young and middle-aged patients with ischemic stroke: a mixed-methods study with IMB model-guided analysis.Frontiers in nutrition · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluates the impact of an information-motivation-behavioral skills model (IMB model) health education intervention combined with feedback on rehabilitation outcomes for ischemic stroke patients with hemiplegia, targeting improvements in motor function, psychological state, disease awareness, and quality of life. A total of 152 ischemic stroke patients with hemiplegia were divided into an experimental group receiving the IMB-based intervention and a control group receiving standard education. Both interventions lasted 3 months. Rehabilitation outcomes were measured using indicators such as Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA) for limb motor function, Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Scale, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) for psychological status, disease cognition, and compliance. The experimental group showed significantly better improvements across all indicators. FMA scores increased notably in the experimental group (58.12 ± 2.22) versus the control (53.65 ± 3.01, P < .001). Activities of Daily Living scores also improved more in the experimental group (79.36 ± 8.36) compared to the control (71.95 ± 7.71, P < .001). Psychological assessments indicated greater HAMA and HAMD score reductions in the experimental group (HAMA: 13.56 ± 2.74 vs 15.26 ± 2.09; HAMD: 15.21 ± 1.98 vs 18.36 ± 1.98, both P < .001). Disease awareness and compliance were higher in the experimental group (P < .05), and stroke-specific quality of life scores were also superior (192.36 ± 18.69 vs 179.36 ± 21.69, P < .001). Additionally, the experimental group experienced fewer complications like spasticity and contractures (P = .002). The IMB-based intervention with feedback shows notable benefits for ischemic stroke patients with hemiplegia, enhancing compliance, motor function, and quality of life. Future research should explore larger samples and longer follow-up to verify long-term effects.
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.