ArticleBMJ open2026
Protocol for a multi-perspective exploration of technology requirements for home-based upper-limb tabletop functional task training with minimal supervision: a mixed-methods and qualitative descriptive study.
Article in BMJ open, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionUpper-limb (UL) impairment following stroke significantly limits independence in activities of daily living (ADLs). Although tabletop functional task-oriented training (FTOT) is a cornerstone of neurorehabilitation, both conventional therapist-led and technology-supported FTOT face limitations in consistency, supervision, progression and continuity across settings. The objectives are to characterise current clinical practices in UL tabletop FTOT and identify stroke survivor-caregiver dyads' needs, constraints and support requirements across clinical and home contexts to inform user-centred technology development. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multi-phase mixed-methods design will be employed. Phase-A will be an explanatory sequential design including a quantitative online survey of rehabilitation therapists (target minimum n=100) to characterise UL tabletop training delivery (eg, task selection, dose, progression). Survey findings will inform subsequent data collection through virtual qualitative interviews with a purposive subsample of therapists (anticipated n≈10-20) to examine task orchestration, adaptation and clinical decision-making in depth. Phase-B will use a descriptive qualitative design involving semi-structured interviews of stroke survivor-caregiver dyads (target n=15 dyads) to explore FTOT experiences across clinical and non-clinical contexts. Quantitative data will be analysed descriptively, and qualitative data will be analysed using inductive content analysis. Mixed-methods integration, within Phase-A and between the two phases, will examine convergence, complementarity, expansion and divergence. Integration will be illustrated using joint displays, visual tools that present the findings from both strands side-by-side using a table or figure. Patient and public involvement activities (n=5) and a pilot dyadic interview (two dyads) were completed to refine study materials and procedures. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of Christian Medical College, Vellore (IRB Min No.
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.