ArticleJournal of rehabilitation medicine2026
Quality of rehabilitation care in Portuguese stroke units: findings from 2017-2018 and 2023 national cross‑sectional surveys.
Article in Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate adherence to stroke rehabilitation guidelines in Portuguese stroke units from the physicians' perspective and examine changes over 6 years.
designA national cross-sectional survey across 2 time periods (2017-2018 and 2023).
methodsStroke units recognized by the Portuguese Stroke Society were invited to participate: 27 in 2017-2018 and 35 in 2023. A structured questionnaire, aligned with national and international guidelines, assessed 5 domains: team composition, care coordination, early assessment and planning, dysfunction assessments, and post-discharge planning.
resultsResponse rates were 93% (n = 25) and 80% (n = 28). Most units (> 75%) had a physiatrist, physiotherapist, speech therapist, rehabilitation nurse, and social worker; only 20% had the full recommended team. Weekly stroke unit meetings were stable (88-89%), while rehabilitation team meetings increased markedly between the 2 periods (20% vs 72%). Rehabilitation started earlier on weekdays (89% vs 79%) than at weekends (68% vs 57%). Dysphagia screening was common (96% vs 89%), but neurogenic bladder assessment was rare (< 8%). The Modified Rankin Scale and Barthel Index were consistently used. Post-discharge planning remained high (92% vs 89%), with improved coordination between teams (48% vs 89%).
conclusionPortuguese Stroke Units demonstrated moderate-to-high adherence to rehabilitation guidelines, with progress in teamwork communication and care coordination, although important gaps remain.
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.