Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17443528›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2007

Cognitive rehabilitation for spatial neglect following stroke.

A Bowen, N B Lincoln

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 98 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Neuropsychological rehabilitation for multiple sclerosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  2. Cognitive rehabilitation for attention deficits following stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Guideline
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The assessment of hemineglect syndrome with cancellation tasks: a comparison between the Bells test and the Apples test.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2017
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Rehabilitation of spatial neglect.Handbook of clinical neurology · 2013
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

A BowenUniversity of Manchester, HCD, School of Psychological Sciences, Humanities Devas Street, Oxford Road, Manchester, UK, M13 9PL. audrey.bowen@manchester.ac.uk
N B Lincoln
University of Manchester · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnilateral spatial neglect causes difficulty attending to one side of space. Various rehabilitation strategies have been used but evidence of their benefit is lacking.

objectivesTo determine the persisting effects of cognitive rehabilitation specifically aimed at spatial neglect following stroke, as measured on impairment and disability level outcome assessments and on destination on discharge from hospital. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 4 July 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to July 2005), EMBASE (1980 to July 2005), CINAHL (1983 to July 2005), PsycINFO (1974 to July 2005), UK National Research Register (July 2005). We handsearched relevant journals, screened reference lists, and tracked citations using SCISEARCH. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials of cognitive rehabilitation specifically aimed at spatial neglect. We excluded studies of general stroke rehabilitation and studies with mixed patient groups, unless more than 75% of their sample were stroke patients or separate stroke data were available. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data, and assessed trial quality. MAIN

resultsWe included 12 RCTs with 306 participants. Only four had adequate allocation concealment, that is a low risk of selection bias. A large number of outcome measures were reported. Only six studies measured disability and two investigated whether the effects persisted. The overall effect (standardised mean difference) on disability had a wide confidence interval that included zero and was not statistically significant. For discharge destination there were clinically significant effects but in both directions and the confidence interval of the odds ratio included one. In contrast, cognitive rehabilitation did improve performance on some, but not all, standardised neglect tests. The number of cancellation errors made was reduced and the ability to find the midpoint of a line improved immediately and persisted at follow up. These effects appeared likely to generalise from the samples studied to the target population, but were based on a small number of studies. AUTHORS'

conclusionsSeveral types of neglect specific approaches are now described but there is insufficient evidence to support or refute their effectiveness at reducing disability and improving independence. They can alter test performance and warrant further investigation in high quality randomised controlled trials. As we did not review whether patients with neglect benefit from rehabilitation input in general, such patients should continue to receive general stroke rehabilitation services.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapySpace PerceptionHumansPerceptual DisordersRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSensation DisordersStrokeStroke Rehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID17443528
OpenAlexW4241851542

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.