ArticleTopics in stroke rehabilitation2017
Assessing chronic stroke survivors with aphasia sheds light on prevalence of spatial neglect.
Article in Topics in stroke rehabilitation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Diagnosis of spatial neglect and rehabilitation access for stroke survivors.Cogent gerontology · 2024Article
- Conventional and functional assessment of spatial neglect: Clinical practice suggestions.Neuropsychology · 2018Article
- Examining Anosognosia of Neglect.OTJR : occupation, participation and health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStroke is a chronic disease. Standardized assessment is essential in order to determine areas for treatment. Individuals with aphasia are often excluded from research, because it is believed that their language impairments may impact their ability to provide informed consent. Thus, right spatial neglect could be under-diagnosed.
objectiveThis study was developed to (1) determine the frequency of spatial neglect in chronic left-brain stroke survivors with aphasia, (2) determine the clinical utility of an aphasia-friendly consent form, and (3) determine any differences between neglect and no-neglect groups regarding activities of daily living (ADL) performance and community independence.
methodsForty-six people were consented at community center. Three were screen failures secondary to the exclusion criteria. A novel, aphasia-friendly consent form was developed to facilitate participation of individuals with aphasia. This enabled 93% or 40 out of the 43 recruited participants to be included in this study. The Behavioral Inattention Test-conventional and the Catherine Bergego Scale via Kessler Foundation Neglect Assessment Process (CBS via KF-NAP) were utilized to determine neglect. The Life Space Questionnaire was used to determine community mobility and independence. The Barthel Index (BI) was used for objective clarification of performance in ADL.
resultsSuccessful use of the consent form resulted in determination that five out of 40 (12.5%) met criteria for spatial neglect; (on the CBS via KF-NAP). The neglect group had lower scores on the Life Space, suggesting less community mobility and independence, however, it was not statistically significant (p = 0.16). Differences in BI scores were also not significant (p = .013) but the neglect group did have reduced independence.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates the need to administer functional neglect assessments in left-brain stroke and to include individuals with aphasia in research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.