The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Inpatient rehabilitation specifically designed for geriatric patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of inpatient rehabilitation specifically designed for geriatric patients compared with usual care on functional status, admissions to nursing homes, and mortality. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, Cochrane database, and reference lists from published literature. Review methods Only randomised controlled trials were included. Trials had to report on inpatient rehabilitation and report at least one of functional improvement, admission to nursing homes, or mortality. Trials of consultation or outpatient services, trials including patients aged <55, trials of non-multidisciplinary rehabilitation, and trials without a control group receiving usual care were excluded. Data were double extracted. Odds ratios and relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: 17 trials with 4780 people comparing the effects of general or orthopaedic geriatric rehabilitation programmes with usual care were included. Meta-analyses of effects indicated an overall benefit in outcomes at discharge (odds ratio 1.75 (95% confidence interval 1.31 to 2.35) for function, relative risk 0.64 (0.51 to 0.81) for nursing home admission, relative risk 0.72 (0.55 to 0.95) for mortality) and at end of follow-up (1.36 (1.07 to 1.71), 0.84 (0.72 to 0.99), 0.87 (0.77 to 0.97), respectively). Limited data were available on impact on health care or cost. Compared with those in control groups, weighted mean length of hospital stay after randomisation was longer in patients allocated to general geriatric rehabilitation (24.5 v 15.1 days) and shorter in patients allocated to orthopaedic rehabilitation (24.6 v 28.9 days). CONCLUSION: Inpatient rehabilitation specifically designed for geriatric patients has the potential to improve outcomes related to function, admission to nursing homes, and mortality. Insufficient data are available for defining characteristics and cost effectiveness of successful programmes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
1 retracted
RETRACTED: Value and application of the ICF in rehabilitation medicine
STUCKI, G., EWERT, T., & CIEZA, A. (2003) · Disability and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1080/09638280110070221 · Cited by 169
RetractedBias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
Self-citationMeta-analysis in clinical trials
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 · Cited by 39,552
Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis
Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1186 · Cited by 36,763
Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias
Begg, C. B., & Mazumdar, M. (1994) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533446 · Cited by 16,955
(1965) · PubMed · Cited by 14,925
Functional evaluation : Barthel index
Mahonery, F. I. (1965) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 12,762
Progress in Development of the Index of ADL
Katz, S., Downs, T. D., Cash, H. R., & Grotz, R. C. (1970) · The Gerontologist · doi:10.1093/geront/10.1_part_1.20 · Cited by 4,118
Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis
Sterne, J. A. C., & Egger, M. (2001) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(01)00377-8 · Cited by 3,779
Self-citationAssessing the quality of controlled clinical trials
Jüni, P., Altman, D. G., & Egger, M. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7303.42 · Cited by 3,309 · cited 1×
“Two reviewers (SB and CF) independently assessed all included trials for quality of the intervention programme and the trial methods. Quality of the intervention programme was measured according to the WHO ICF framework rehabilitation cycle. It included whether or not studies performed multidimensional geriatric asses…”
MethodSelf-citation
Cited by
Interpretation of random effects meta-analyses
Riley, R. D., Higgins, J. P. T., & Deeks, J. J. (2011) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.d549 · Cited by 2,884
Ellis, G., Whitehead, M. A., Robinson, D., O'Neill, D., & Langhorne, P. (2011) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.d6553 · Cited by 1,068
Hospitalization-Associated Disability: “She Was Probably Able to Ambulate, but I’m Not Sure”
Covinsky, K. E., Pierluissi, E., & Johnston, C. B. (2011) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2011.1556 · Cited by 934
Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital
Ellis, G., Gardner, M., Tsiachristas, A., Langhorne, P., Burke, O., Harwood, R. H., Conroy, S. P., Kircher, T., Somme, D., Saltvedt, I., et al. (2017) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd006211.pub3 · Cited by 853
Schoenenberger, A. W., Stortecky, S., Neumann, S., Moser, A., Juni, P., Carrel, T., Huber, C., Gandon, M., Bischoff, S., Schoenenberger, C.-M., et al. (2013) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehs304 · Cited by 299
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Bachmann, S., Finger, C., Huss, A., Egger, M., Stuck, A. E., & Clough-Gorr, K. M.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2010-04-20
- Volume
- 340
- Issue
- apr20 2
- Pages
- c1718-c1718
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W1999314634
- Cited by
- 537
- References
- 53
- FWCI
- 7.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Inpatient rehabilitation specifically designed for geriatric patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.c1718
- The paper
- Bachmann, S., Finger, C., Huss, A., Egger, M., Stuck, A. E., & Clough-Gorr, K. M. (2010). Inpatient rehabilitation specifically designed for geriatric patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c1718
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
