The Bobath concept (NDT) in adult neurorehabilitation: a scoping review of conceptual literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This scoping review aims to describe how Bobath concept is conceptualized, operationalized, and studied in adult neurorehabilitation. METHODS: The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and the Preferred Reporting Items for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines were adopted. Non-scientific and research articles were searched in electronic databases PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), with the keywords "Bobath" or "Neurodevelopmental Treatment", published in English, Spanish, and Portuguese, between 2013 and 2023. RESULTS: Of the 78 publications identified, 31 articles addressed the conceptual underpinnings of Bobath concept (seven theoretical papers, seven Delphi/surveys/mixed methods studies, four qualitative studies, one scoping review, 10 letters to the editor, and two editorials), comprising five themes: (a) theoretical principles; (b) clinical principles; (c) clinical reasoning; (d) conceptualizing movement; and, current (e) evidence debate. The revised definition and the Model of Bobath Clinical Practice provide a clarification of the unique aspects of Bobath concept. A new clinical skill was identified beyond facilitation - visuospatial kinesthetic perception - as well as how Bobath experts conceptualize movement, which are all integral to clinical reasoning. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides an updated Bobath clinical framework that gathers the theoretical foundations and clinical practice principles that require careful consideration in the design of future intervention studies. Implications for rehabilitationThis scoping review consolidates the clinical and theoretical principles of contemporary Bobath practice, providing a clear framework for clinicians.The Model of Bobath Clinical Practice (MBCP) framework enables detailed documentation of movement analysis and movement diagnosis, guiding clinical reasoning and interventions.This review identifies fundamental principles and practices to inform future Bobath intervention studies, ensuring their clinical relevance.A framework with specific recommendations has been developed to guide Bobath intervention studies, enhancing the integration of clinical practice, education, and research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.030 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.022 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".