ArticleAnnals of rehabilitation medicine2019
Reliability and Validity of the Comprehensive Limb and Oral Apraxia Test: Standardization and Clinical Application in Korean Patients With Stroke.
Article in Annals of rehabilitation medicine, 2019. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cerebrolysin Concentrate: Therapeutic Potential for Severe Oral Apraxia After Stroke: A Case Report.Brain & NeuroRehabilitation · 2024Article
- The Effectiveness of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Treating Apraxia.CNS & neurological disorders drug targets · 2024Review
- Gerstmann Syndrome as a Disconnection Syndrome: A Single Case Diffusion Tensor Imaging Study.Brain & NeuroRehabilitation · 2023Article
- The Incidence of Aphasia, Cognitive Deficits, Apraxia, Dysarthria, and Dysphagia in Acute Post Stroke Persian Speaking Adults.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo develop and standardize the Limb and Oral Apraxia Test (LOAT) for Korean patients and investigate its reliability, validity, and clinical usefulness for patients with stroke.
methodsWe developed the LOAT according to a cognitive neuropsychological model of limb and oral praxis. The test included meaningless, intransitive, transitive, and oral praxis composed of 72 items (56 items on limb praxis and 16 items on oral praxis; maximum score 216). We standardized the LOAT in a nationwide sample of 324 healthy adults. Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity tests were performed in patients with stroke. We prospectively applied the LOAT in 80 patients and analyzed the incidence of apraxia. We also compared the clinical characteristics between the apraxia and non-apraxia groups.
resultsThe internal consistency was high (Cronbach's alpha=0.952). The inter-rater and intra-rater reliability and concurrent validity were also high (r=0.924-0.992, 0.961-0.999, and 0.830, respectively; p<0.001). The mean total, limb, and oral scores were not significantly different according to age and education (p>0.05). Among the 80 patients with stroke, 19 (23.8%) had limb apraxia and 21 (26.3%) had oral apraxia. Left hemispheric lesions and aphasia were significantly more frequently observed in the limb/oral apraxia group than in the non-apraxia group (p<0.001).
conclusionThe LOAT is a newly developed comprehensive test for limb and oral apraxia for Korean patients with stroke. It has high internal consistency, reliability, and validity and is a useful apraxia test for patients with stroke.
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.