SynthesisBMC health services research2026
Recommendations for rehabilitation of post-stroke multifunctional disorders: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines.
Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStroke survivors frequently experience persistent and overlapping functional impairments. Effective rehabilitation is essential to optimizing recovery and minimizing disability after stroke. Clinical practice guidelines offer evidence-based recommendations to support the delivery of standardized, high-quality care. However, most existing systematic reviews of stroke rehabilitation guidelines focus on single impairments.
objectiveThis review aimed to evaluate the quality and clinical applicability of stroke rehabilitation guidelines and to summarize recommendations relevant to the complex and long-term needs of post-stroke patients across multiple domains, such as cognition, motor function, swallowing, speech, and mood.
methodsClinical practice guidelines and expert consensus published between 2015 and 2025 were searched in databases and guideline websites. The quality and applicability of the guidelines were independently evaluated by five investigators using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE II) and the Appraisal of Guidelines Research & Evaluation Recommendation Excellence (AGREE-REX). Recommendations classified as “strong” or “Class I/Class IIa, Level of Evidence A/B” for stroke rehabilitation were extracted based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) core set for stroke.
resultsTwelve guidelines were included in this review. AGREE‑REX scores showed a similar proportion of high‑quality and moderate‑quality guidelines, while most guidelines achieved class A according to AGREE II. The lowest AGREE II domain score was “applicability,” while “values and preferences” scored lowest on AGREE-REX. Thirty-nine consistent and 24 inconsistent recommendations were identified. Consistent recommendations included multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) providing comprehensive services and interventions such as enriched environments, psychological therapy, aerobic exercise, and progressive position transfer training for dual or multifunctional impairments. Differences were noted in tele-rehabilitation, acupuncture, rehabilitation timing, and strength of psychological therapy recommendations.
conclusionDespite the high quality of stroke rehabilitation guidelines, they often lack applicability and fail to incorporate patient and caregiver preferences. This study streamlined redundant recommendations into integrated strategies for multiple impairments based on the ICF core set. Further research is needed to clarify the optimal dose and efficacy of psychological therapy and acupuncture.
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.