Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 213

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Improving stroke rehabilitation. A controlled study.

Kalra, L, Dale, P, Crome, P·1993·Stroke

Abstract

Assessment of stroke rehabilitation is complicated by the heterogeneity of patients and settings and by difficulties in disentangling effects of organization from effects of types and amounts of treatment input. A prospective controlled study was undertaken in 245 stroke patients stratified into three groups according to prognosis and managed on a stroke rehabilitation unit (n = 124) or general medical wards (n = 121). Patients were randomly allocated to either setting 2 weeks after stroke and were comparable for baseline characteristics. Patients on general medical wards received more physiotherapy on average (16.2 +/- 7.2 versus 14.3 +/- 3.2 hours; P < .05) but similar amounts of occupational therapy (9.3 +/- 2.8 versus 9.5 +/- 3.2 hours) compared with stroke unit patients. More time was spent on individual rehabilitation on the stroke unit compared with general wards (P < .001). Functional abilities at discharge, destination of discharge, and length of hospital stay in patients with good prognosis were comparable in both settings. Patients with poor prognosis managed on general wards showed higher mortality (P < .05) and longer hospital stay (123.2 +/- 48.2 versus 52.3 +/- 19.8 days; P < .001), but functional abilities at discharge in survivors were comparable with those of stroke unit patients. Patients with intermediate prognosis had significantly better outcome on the stroke unit, with more patients being discharged home (75% versus 52%; P < .001), shorter average length of hospital stay (48.7 +/- 17.2 versus 104.6 +/- 28.6 days; P < .001), and better functional abilities at discharge (P < .05). Stroke units improve outcome and reduce hospital stay without increasing therapy time. Their effectiveness may be enhanced by patient selection.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.str.24.10.1462

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 213

Metadata

Authors
Kalra, L., Dale, P., & Crome, P.
Venue
Stroke
Published
1993-10
Volume
24
Issue
10
Pages
1462-1467
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2084195775
Cited by
213
References
1
FWCI
17.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Improving stroke rehabilitation. A controlled study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.str.24.10.1462
The paper
Kalra, L., Dale, P., & Crome, P. (1993). Improving stroke rehabilitation. A controlled study. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.24.10.1462

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.