Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/25668
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHayward, Kathryn S-
dc.contributor.authorChurilov, Leonid-
dc.contributor.authorDalton, Emily J-
dc.contributor.authorBrodtmann, Amy-
dc.contributor.authorCampbell, Bruce C V-
dc.contributor.authorCopland, David-
dc.contributor.authorDancause, Numa-
dc.contributor.authorGodecke, Erin-
dc.contributor.authorHoffmann, Tammy C-
dc.contributor.authorLannin, Natasha A-
dc.contributor.authorMcDonald, Matthew W-
dc.contributor.authorCorbett, Dale-
dc.contributor.authorBernhardt, Julie-
dc.date2021-01-12-
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-15T04:59:51Z-
dc.date.available2021-01-15T04:59:51Z-
dc.date.issued2021-01-
dc.identifier.citationStroke 2021; 52(2): 761-769en
dc.identifier.urihttps://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/25668-
dc.description.abstractDose articulation is a universal issue of intervention development and testing. In stroke recovery, dose of a nonpharmaceutical intervention appears to influence outcome but is often poorly reported. The challenges of articulating dose in nonpharmacological stroke recovery research include: (1) the absence of specific internationally agreed dose reporting guidelines; (2) inadequate conceptualization of dose, which is multidimensional; and (3) unclear and inconsistent terminology that incorporates the multiple dose dimensions. To address these challenges, we need a well-conceptualized and consistent approach to dose articulation that can be applied across stroke recovery domains to stimulate critical thinking about dose during intervention development, as well as promote reporting of planned intervention dose versus actually delivered dose. We followed the Design Research Paradigm to develop a framework that guides how to articulate dose, conceptualizes the multidimensional nature and systemic linkages between dose dimensions, and provides reference terminology for the field. Our framework recognizes that dose is multidimensional and comprised of a duration of days that contain individual sessions and episodes that can be active (time on task) or inactive (time off task), and each individual episode can be made up of information about length, intensity, and difficulty. Clinical utility of this framework was demonstrated via hypothetical application to preclinical and clinical domains of stroke recovery. The suitability of the framework to address dose articulation challenges was confirmed with an international expert advisory group. This novel framework provides a pathway for better articulation of nonpharmacological dose that will enable transparent and accurate description, implementation, monitoring, and reporting, in stroke recovery research.en
dc.language.isoeng
dc.subjectaphasiaen
dc.subjectcognitionen
dc.subjectreference standardsen
dc.subjectStroke rehabilitationen
dc.subjectupper extremityen
dc.titleAdvancing Stroke Recovery Through Improved Articulation of Nonpharmacological Intervention Dose.en
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.journaltitleStrokeen
dc.identifier.affiliationThe Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Healthen
dc.identifier.affiliationMelbourne Medical School, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationMelbourne School of Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationFlorey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Medicine and Neurology, Melbourne Brain Centre, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationSchool of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Queensland Aphasia Research Centre and UQ Centre for Clinical Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia (D. Copland) NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Aphasia Recovery and Rehabilitation, Melbourne, Victoria, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationDépartement de Neurosciences, Université de Montréal, Canadaen
dc.identifier.affiliationNHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Aphasia Recovery and Rehabilitation, Melbourne, Victoria, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationInstitute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University, Robina, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Neurosciences, Central Clinical School, Alfred Health, Monash University, Melbourne, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationCellular and Molecular Medicine and Canadian Partnership for Stroke Recovery, University of Ottawa, Canadaen
dc.identifier.affiliationNHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Stroke Rehabilitation and Brain Recovery, University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Australiaen
dc.identifier.doi10.1161/STROKEAHA.120.032496en
dc.type.contentTexten
dc.identifier.pubmedid33430635
local.name.researcherBrodtmann, Amy
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
crisitem.author.deptThe Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health-
crisitem.author.deptMedicine (University of Melbourne)-
crisitem.author.deptThe Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health-
crisitem.author.deptThe Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health-
Appears in Collections:Journal articles
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

82
checked on Dec 27, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.