ArticlePatient preference and adherence2025
Why We Keep Going: A Qualitative Longitudinal Study of the Motivation and Engagement Among Patients with COPD During a Long-Term Danish Tele-Rehabilitation Program.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparing Pulmonary Telerehabilitation and Center-Based Pulmonary Rehabilitation for Effectiveness and Adherence in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Internet of things-based pulmonary rehabilitation for moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a prospective non-randomized controlled intervention study protocol.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- An analysis of factors and pathways related to rehabilitation motivation in stroke patients based on self-determination theory.Frontiers in neurology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Pulmonary tele-rehabilitation (PTR) is an effective treatment for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, determinants of sustained motivation and adherence have been sparsely investigated. Aim: This study examined how motivation and engagement evolved throughout 25 weeks of a maintenance PTR program in patients with moderate to very severe COPD. Methods: In a qualitative study with a longitudinal recurrent cross-sectional design, 11 individual semi-structured interviews were conducted after 10 week of Homebased Pulmonary Rehabilitation (HPR) or PTR intervention and 10 interviews were conducted after 25 weeks into the maintenance PTR program with 16 patients participating in a randomized controlled trial on pulmonary tele-rehabilitation at Hvidovre Hospital, Denmark. The interview guide and initial coding framework were directed by the Theoretical Domains Framework in a deductive content analysis. An unconstrained matrix, based on inductive principles, was used to capture categories across multiple domains. Results: Three main categories emerged: (1) Acceptance and Hope, (2) Physical Factors, and (3) External Support. Over time, participants developed greater acceptance of COPD, transitioning from fear-driven motivation to sustained engagement through improved coping strategies. Easy PTR access, continuous therapist, and peer support were key factors in maintaining adherence. Conclusion: Over the course of 25 weeks, motivation evolved from fear-driven to autonomous, reflective engagement. The results emphasize the importance of external support and tailored environments like remote delivery methods for long-term adherence to maintenance PTR programs.
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.