↓ Skip to main content

Strategies to improve the quality of life of persons post-stroke: protocol of a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Strategies to improve the quality of life of persons post-stroke: protocol of a systematic review
Published in
Systematic Reviews, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13643-017-0579-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah E.P. Munce, Laure Perrier, Saeha Shin, Chamila Adhihetty, Kristen Pitzul, Michelle L.A. Nelson, Mark T. Bayley

Abstract

While many outcomes post-stroke (e.g., depression) have been previously investigated, there is no complete data on the impact of a variety of quality improvement strategies on the quality of life and physical and psychological well-being of individuals post-stroke. The current paper outlines a systematic review protocol on the impact of quality improvement strategies on quality of life as well as physical and psychological well-being of individuals with stroke. MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases will be searched. Two independent reviewers will conduct all levels of screening, data abstraction, and quality appraisal. Only randomized controlled trials that report on the impact of quality improvement strategies on quality of life outcomes in people with stroke will be included. The secondary outcomes will be physical and psychological well-being. Quality improvement strategies include audit and feedback, case management, team changes, electronic patient registries, clinician education, clinical reminders, facilitated relay of clinical information to clinicians, patient education, (promotion of) self-management, patient reminder systems, and continuous quality improvement. Studies published since 2000 will be included to increase the relevancy of findings. Results will be grouped according to the target group of the varying quality improvement strategies (i.e., health system, health care professionals, or patients) and/or by any other noteworthy grouping variables, such as etiology of stroke or by sex. This systematic review will identify those quality improvement strategies aimed at the health system, health care professionals, and patients that impact the quality of life of individuals with stroke. Improving awareness and utilization of such strategies may enhance uptake of stroke best practices and reduce inappropriate health care utilization costs. PROSPERO, CRD42017064141.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 115 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 10%
Student > Master 9 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Researcher 8 7%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 42 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 14%
Psychology 7 6%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Engineering 5 4%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 46 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 October 2017.
All research outputs
#18,575,277
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,790
of 2,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,077
of 315,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#37
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,005 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 315,650 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.