| Title |
Promoting psychosocial well-being following stroke: study protocol for a randomized, controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Psychology, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40359-018-0223-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marit Kirkevold, Line Kildal Bragstad, Berit A. Bronken, Kari Kvigne, Randi Martinsen, Ellen Gabrielsen Hjelle, Gabriele Kitzmüller, Margrete Mangset, Sanne Angel, Lena Aadal, Siren Eriksen, Torgeir B. Wyller, Unni Sveen |
| Abstract |
Stroke is a major public health threat globally. Psychosocial well-being may be affected following stroke. Depressive symptoms, anxiety, general psychological distress and social isolation are prevalent. Approximately one third report depressive symptoms and 20% report anxiety during the first months or years after the stroke. Psychosocial difficulties may impact significantly on long-term functioning and quality of life, reduce the effects of rehabilitation services and lead to higher mortality rates. The aim of the study is to evaluate the effect of a previously developed and feasibility tested dialogue-based psychosocial intervention aimed at promoting psychosocial well-being and coping following stroke among stroke survivors with and without aphasia. The study will be conducted as a multicenter, randomized, single blind controlled trial with one intervention and one control arm. It will include a total of 330 stroke survivors randomly allocated into either an intervention group (dialogue-based intervention to promote psychosocial well-being) or a control group (usual care). Participants in the intervention group will receive eight individual sessions of supported dialogues in their homes during the first six months following an acute stroke. The primary outcome measure will be psychosocial well-being measured by the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ). Secondary outcome measures will be quality of life (SAQoL), sense of coherence (SOC), and depression (Yale). Process evaluation will be conducted in a longitudinal mixed methods study by individual qualitative interviews with 15-20 participants in the intervention and control groups, focus group interviews with the intervention personnel and data collectors, and a comprehensive analysis of implementation fidelity. The intervention described in this study protocol is based on thorough development and feasibility work, guided by the UK medical research council framework for developing and testing complex interventions. It combines classical effectiveness evaluation with a thorough process evaluation. The results from this study may inform the development of further trials aimed at promoting psychosocial well-being following stroke as well as inform the psychosocial follow up of stroke patients living at home. NCT02338869 ; registered 10/04/2014 (On-going trial). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 80% |
| Japan | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 245 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 245 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 39 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 32 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 9% |
| Researcher | 17 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 4% |
| Other | 31 | 13% |
| Unknown | 93 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 47 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 14% |
| Psychology | 26 | 11% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 6% |
| Unknown | 107 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 April 2018.
All research outputs
#2,829,757
of 23,039,416 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychology
#188
of 797 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,049
of 329,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychology
#13
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,039,416 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 797 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,118 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.