Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32573333›Full record

ArticleNeuropsychological rehabilitation2021

Assessment of spatial neglect in clinical practice: A nationwide survey.

Lars Evald, Inge Wilms, Maria Nordfang

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neuropsychological rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Understanding Occupational Therapists' Knowledge and Confidence When Assessing for Spatial Neglect: A Special Issue Review.The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Lars EvaldHammel Neurorehabilitation Centre and University Research Clinic, Hammel, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6255-2562
Inge WilmsDepartment of Psychology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0369-6659
Maria NordfangDepartment of Neurology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2183-0447

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study was part of a nationwide, anonymous, open Internet survey conducted amongst healthcare professionals in Denmark on the assessment and treatment of spatial neglect (SN). The objective was to describe knowledge and practices in the assessment of SN in current clinical practice across different healthcare sectors and professions. Data included the perceived prevalence, assessment methods and observations, subtypes and differential diagnostics of SN. A total of 525 professionals participated in the survey. The vast majority (81.5%) reported that assessment of SN was provided by their workplace. The median of perceived prevalence of SN was 35% (IQR 22-51) but major differences were found between professions. Occupational therapists and psychologists appeared to be most involved in assessment, whilst nursing staff and speech therapists were least involved. Subjective observations were the most common assessment method (90%). Conversely, systematic ADL observations, paper-and-pencil tests, confrontational tests and computerized tests were less common. The survey revealed large differences in the assessment methods and awareness of various aspects of SN symptoms (subtypes and differential diagnostics) between different healthcare professions. The results emphasize the need for international multidisciplinary clinical guidelines on how to assess SN and distinguish between different subtypes and differential diagnoses.

Indexed as

Perceptual DisordersStrokeHealth PersonnelHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesBrain injuriesPerceptual disordersSpatial neglectStrokeSurveys and questionnairesSymptom assessment

Identifiers

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.