ArticleScientific reports2025
Perceived determinants of clinical practice guideline implementation for stroke rehabilitation in LMICs a multinational REFORM survey.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Implementation of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is integral to improving the quality of stroke rehabilitation in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, various barriers hinder their effective utilization. This survey aimed to identify the barriers faced by rehabilitation professionals in utilizing CPGs for post-stroke motor rehabilitation. A cross-sectional survey based on the Australian Living Guidelines for Stroke Rehabilitation was developed to identify factors that influence healthcare professionals' adherence to clinical practice guidelines. The survey comprised 50 questions spanning five domains: demographics, work practices, rehabilitation techniques, clinical practice awareness, and CPG feasibility and implementation. A panel of 10 experts validated the questionnaire. The survey was disseminated via emails, through professional associations, and platforms such as WhatsApp, LinkedIn, and X (formerly Twitter). Quantitative analysis data were analysed using Jamovi 2.3.21. The results indicated that less experienced professionals were more likely to implement CPGs, utilize telerehabilitation, and follow transition care protocols, while experienced practitioners adhered to both CPGs and hospital guidelines and employed motor outcome measures. Identified barriers included limited awareness, insufficient training, resource constraints, and challenges related to language and cultural relevance. To enhance CPG implementation, it is necessary to develop context-specific CPGs, establish stepwise clinical protocols, integrate evidence-based practice and CPG training into university curricula, and increase awareness among policymakers and stroke survivors. Engaging diverse stakeholders-patients, caregivers, multidisciplinary teams, and policymakers-is essential to foster an enabling environment for CPG adoption and advancing stroke rehabilitation practices in LMICs.
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.