ReviewJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2026
Mapping of Reablement Research - A Scoping Review of Reviews.
Review in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07772739 (Collaborative Reablement Service Model Implementation in Community-Based Settings), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Collaborative Reablement Service Model Implementation in Community-Based Settings
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Over the past two decades, "reablement" has been implemented in several countries to address older adults` ability to participate in daily activities and their preference towards ageing at home. As a result, research activity has increased, leading to a growing number of reviews exploring various aspects of reablement. However, no review to date has mapped or summarized the key findings and intervention descriptions across these reviews. Objective: The objectives were to identify the main results in reviews on reablement and to map how reablement interventions are described in reviews. Methods: As this is a scoping review of reviews, a scoping review approach according to JBI manual for Evidence Synthesis was conducted. Data searches were performed in nine databases and one search engine by a research librarian. Two reviewers independently screened the reviews for eligibility and extracted data using a standardized extraction form. A descriptive data analysis was performed. Results: Twenty-five reviews were included. While the included systematic reviews reported mixed results on effectiveness, evidence trends suggest that reablement can improve ADL, IADL, and quality of life, and reduce service costs and health service use. Reablement interventions were characterized by emphasizing self-maintenance, activity, and a person-centered, holistic approach. Conclusion: This review contributes with an overview of the growing evidence base of reablement. While findings regarding effectiveness are promising, inconsistencies persist - partly due to the interchangeable use of "reablement" with other interventions, affecting internal validity of the findings. Variation in intervention components reflects differing conceptualizations across countries. While this suggests a need for standardization, it also allows for flexible adaptation to diverse policy and cultural contexts. Due to the lack of a clear conceptualization of reablement, we recommend that future research describe the concept and specify its components to enable better comparison of approaches and distinguish it from related interventions.
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.