Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36047309›Full record

ArticleAustralian occupational therapy journal2023

The Oxford Cognitive Screen for use with Australian people after stroke (OCS-AU): The adaptation process and determining cut scores for cognitive impairment using a cross-sectional normative study.

Colette Sanctuary, Luisa Hewitt, Nele Demeyere, Kirsti Kankkunen, D Vincent Oxenham, Dawn B Simpson, Renerus J Stolwyk, Artemis Synn, Sam S Webb, Dianne L Marsden

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Australian occupational therapy journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Colette SanctuaryHunter Stroke Service, Hunter New England Local Health Service, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0459-3240
Luisa HewittHunter Stroke Service, Hunter New England Local Health Service, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6875-9262
Nele DemeyereTranslational Neuropsychology Research Group, Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0416-5147
Kirsti KankkunenHampstead Rehabilitation Centre, Central Adelaide Local Health Network, SA Health, Lightview, SA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3744-1040
D Vincent OxenhamSchool of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5165-9540
Dawn B SimpsonSchool of Health Sciences, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9386-4830
Renerus J StolwykTurner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4975-3332
Artemis SynnHampstead Rehabilitation Centre, Central Adelaide Local Health Network, SA Health, Lightview, SA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3418-2888
Sam S WebbTranslational Neuropsychology Research Group, Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0029-4665
Dianne L MarsdenHunter Stroke Service, Hunter New England Local Health Service, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6943-8428
Belmont Hospital · AUHunter Medical Research Institute · AUOxford Research Group · GBSA Health · AUEpworth Hospital · AURoyal North Shore Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTwo parallel versions (A and B) of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS) were developed in the United Kingdom (UK) as a stroke-specific screen of five key cognitive domains commonly affected post-stroke. We aimed to develop the Australian versions A and B (OCS-AU), including Australian cut-scores indicative of impairment. We hypothesised there to be no difference in performance between the UK and Australian normative data cohorts.

methodsOur multidisciplinary expert panel used the UK pre-defined process to develop the OCS-AU versions A and B. We then conducted a cross-sectional normative study. We purposively recruited community-dwelling, Australian-born, and educated adults; with no known cognitive impairment; representative of age, sex, education level, and living location; at seven sites (four metropolitan, three regional) across four Australian states. Participants completed one or both OCS-AU versions in a randomised order. Australian cohorts were compared with the corresponding UK cohorts for demographics using Pearson's chi-squared test for sex and education, and Welch two-sample t test for age. For the cut-scores indicating cognitive impairment, the fifth (95th) percentiles and group mean performance score for each scored item were compared using Welch two-sample t tests. The pre-defined criteria for retaining OCS cut-scores had no statistically significant difference in either percentile or group mean scores for each scored item.

resultsParticipants (n = 83) were recruited: fifty-eight completed version A [age (years) mean = 61,SD = 15; 62% female], 60 completed version B [age (years) mean = 62,SD = 13, 53% female], and 35 completed both [age (years) mean = 64,SD = 11, 54% female]. Education was different between the cohorts for version B (12 years, p = 0.002). Cut-scores for all 16 scored items for the OCS-AU version B and 15/16 for version A met our pre-defined criteria for retaining the OCS cut scores.

conclusionsThe OCS-AU provides clinicians with an Australian-specific, first-line cognitive screening tool for people after stroke. Early screening can guide treatment and management.

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionOccupational TherapyStrokeAdultAustraliaCognitionCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleNeuropsychological TestsAustraliacognitiondiagnosisscreeningStroke

Identifiers

PMID36047309
PMCPMC10087605
OpenAlexW4294128274

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.