↓ Skip to main content

Carers’ experiences, needs and preferences during inpatient stroke rehabilitation: a protocol for a systematic review of qualitative studies

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Carers’ experiences, needs and preferences during inpatient stroke rehabilitation: a protocol for a systematic review of qualitative studies
Published in
Systematic Reviews, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13643-015-0097-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julie A. Luker, Susanne Bernhardsson, Elizabeth Lynch, Carolyn Murray, Olivia P. Hill, Julie Bernhardt

Abstract

Large numbers of people provide carer roles for survivors of stroke. Person-centred stroke rehabilitation must consider the perspectives of carers, as stroke affects not only the stroke survivor but also the quality of life and health of the carers. There is little collective knowledge about stroke carers' experiences, needs and preferences during the inpatient stroke rehabilitation process to then inform person-centred service improvements. Our objective is to report and synthesise experiences, needs and preferences of the carers of stroke survivors undergoing rehabilitation in inpatient settings. We will conduct a systematic review of qualitative studies using a thematic synthesis methodology. We will follow the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research Guidelines (ENTREQ) and search the following databases for relevant articles: MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO, Embase, and Web of Science. No language or publication date constraints will be applied. Eligible studies will have to use qualitative methods of data collection and analysis and reported data from the carers of stroke survivors who underwent inpatient stroke rehabilitation. Studies will be eligible for inclusion if they report the experiences, needs and preferences of carers regarding inpatient rehabilitation environments, organisation, care systems, therapeutic interventions, information exchange, carer training, discharge and community service planning and other issues of relevance to their roles as carers. Study selection and assessment of quality will be performed independently by two reviewers. Any disagreement will be resolved by a third reviewer. Data will be extracted by one reviewer, tabled, and checked for accuracy by another reviewer. All text reported in studies' results, discussion and conclusion sections will be entered into the NVivo software for analysis. Extracted texts will be inductively coded independently by two reviewers and analysed in three phases using thematic synthesis. Descriptive and analytical themes will be developed. This study is expected to provide new insights into the perspectives of stroke survivors' carers. Increased knowledge about carer perspectives and preferences will inform person-centred improvements in stroke rehabilitation. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42015017315 .

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 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 84 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 19 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 20 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 21%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Psychology 3 3%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 27 31%
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 14 August 2015.
All research outputs
#15,342,608
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,590
of 1,998 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,998
of 353,117 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#39
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,998 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 353,117 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.