↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Self management programmes for quality of life in people with stroke

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
50 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
185 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
513 Mendeley
Title
Self management programmes for quality of life in people with stroke
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010442.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline E Fryer, Julie A Luker, Michelle N McDonnell, Susan L Hillier

Abstract

Stroke results from an acute lack of blood supply to the brain and becomes a chronic health condition for millions of survivors around the world. Self management can offer stroke survivors a pathway to promote their recovery. Self management programmes for people with stroke can include specific education about the stroke and likely effects but essentially, also focusses on skills training to encourage people to take an active part in their management. Such skills training can include problem-solving, goal-setting, decision-making, and coping skills. To assess the effects of self management interventions on the quality of life of adults with stroke who are living in the community, compared with inactive or active (usual care) control interventions. We searched the following databases from inception to April 2016: the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, Web of Science, OTSeeker, OT Search, PEDro, REHABDATA, and DARE. We also searched the following trial registries: ClinicalTrials.gov, Stroke Trials Registry, Current Controlled Trials, World Health Organization, and Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. We included randomised controlled trials of adults with stroke living in the community who received self management interventions. These interventions included more than one component of self management or targeted more than a single domain of change, or both. Interventions were compared with either an inactive control (waiting list or usual care) or active control (alternate intervention such as education only). Measured outcomes included changes in quality of life, self efficacy, activity or participation levels, impairments, health service usage, health behaviours (such as medication adherence or lifestyle behaviours), cost, participant satisfaction, or adverse events. Two review authors independently extracted prespecified data from all included studies and assessed trial quality and risk of bias. We performed meta-analyses where possible to pool results. We included 14 trials with 1863 participants. Evidence from six studies showed that self management programmes improved quality of life in people with stroke (standardised mean difference (SMD) random effects 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 0.62, P = 0.02; moderate quality evidence) and improved self efficacy (SMD, random effects 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.61, P = 0.03; low quality evidence) compared with usual care. Individual studies reported benefits for health-related behaviours such as reduced use of health services, smoking, and alcohol intake, as well as improved diet and attitude. However, there was no superior effect for such programmes in the domains of locus of control, activities of daily living, medication adherence, participation, or mood. Statistical heterogeneity was mostly low; however, there was much variation in the types and delivery of programmes. Risk of bias was relatively low for complex intervention clinical trials where participants and personnel could not be blinded. The current evidence indicates that self management programmes may benefit people with stroke who are living in the community. The benefits of such programmes lie in improved quality of life and self efficacy. These are all well-recognised goals for people after stroke. There is evidence for many modes of delivery and examples of tailoring content to the target group. Leaders were usually professionals but peers (stroke survivors and carers) were also reported - the commonality is being trained and expert in stroke and its consequences. It would be beneficial for further research to be focused on identifying key features of effective self management programmes and assessing their cost-effectiveness.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 50 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 513 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 513 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 90 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 53 10%
Student > Bachelor 52 10%
Researcher 45 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 4%
Other 76 15%
Unknown 175 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 107 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 93 18%
Psychology 35 7%
Social Sciences 20 4%
Neuroscience 19 4%
Other 48 9%
Unknown 191 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 30 September 2019.
All research outputs
#1,206,103
of 26,177,525 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,348
of 13,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,539
of 357,885 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#52
of 265 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,177,525 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,191 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 357,885 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 265 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.