Observational studyArchives of physical medicine and rehabilitation2026
Ethnic Differences in Postacute Stroke Rehabilitation.
Observational study in Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2026. 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.
- The importance of health equity research for all populations in the United States: SEQUINS hall of fame lecture.Equity neuroscience · 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
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate ethnic differences in poststroke rehabilitation between Mexican American (MA) and non-Hispanic White (NHW) stroke patients.
designProspective cohort study.
settingCommunity-based (December 2019 to August 2024).
participantsOf 1453 stroke patients (N=1453), the median age was 66 years, 46% were women, and 66% were MA.
interventionsNot applicable.
main outcome measuresStroke patients or their proxies were contacted every 2 weeks for 90 days after stroke to identify their rehabilitation provider: inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF), skilled nursing facility, home health agency (HHA), or outpatient rehabilitation. Binomial regression was used to model the association of ethnicity (MA vs NHW) with IRF as the first rehabilitation provider. Sequential modeling and propensity-score adjustment were used to investigate demographic and clinical variables impacting ethnic disparities.
resultsRehabilitation services were received by 974 patients in the 90 days after stroke; 34% of patients received no rehabilitation for the first 2 calls. The most common transitions between the first 2 providers were HHA to home without rehabilitation (14%), IRF to HHA (10%), and IRF to home without rehabilitation (7%). NHW patients had higher IRF usage as the first provider compared with MA patients (NHW vs MA risk difference=7.4%, 95% CI, 0.8-14.0). This difference remained after adjustment for patient and clinical factors (risk difference=6.5%, 95% CI, -0.1 to 13.0) and was attenuated by 74.6% after further adjustment for socioeconomic status (risk difference=1.9%, 95% CI, -5.2 to 9.0). Propensity-score methods implemented in a separate model confirmed a smaller, nonsignificant effect (risk difference=2%, 95% CI, -6 to 9) given observed covariates.
conclusionsMA stroke patients are less likely to receive rehabilitation in an IRF as the first provider after stroke compared with NHW stroke patients. This difference is largely explained by socioeconomic status.
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.