Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36591546›Full record

ReviewInnovations in clinical neuroscience

Stroop Test for Parkinson's Disease with Deep Brain Stimulation: A Systematic Review.

Amer Cavalheiro Hamdan, Mariana Drabik Vieira

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Innovations in clinical neuroscience. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Amer Cavalheiro HamdanDr. Hamdan is with the Graduate Program in Psychology, Department of Psychology, Federal University of Parana in Curitiba, Brazil.
Mariana Drabik VieiraDr. Vieira is a psychologist, candidate to master's in psychology, Department of Psychology, Graduate Program in Psychology, Federal University of Parana in Curitiba, Brazil.
Universidade Federal do Paraná · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is considered an alternative treatment for patients with rapidly developing Parkinson's disease (PD). DBS can cause cognitive changes, and it is necessary to perform an executive assessment before and after DBS to better define the prognosis. Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze the use of the Stroop test for assessment of cognitive functions in patients with PD undergoing DBS. Methods: The systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Pubmed, Scopus, PsycInfo, and Web of Science were used as electronic databases. All included studies assessed the cognitive ability of patients with PD undergoing DBS through the application of the Stroop test. Results: Thirty-five articles met the inclusion criteria. Among the studies, there were different formats of Stroop applications. Twenty-three articles presented negative results in relation to the individuals' performances in Stroop, compared to the control groups. The results suggested that there was no correlation between low performance in the test and global cognitive risk for the patients. Conclusion: Patients with DBS declined in Stroop performance and showed impairments in response inhibition and speed. These results are not related to the lack of cognitive security of DBS. The Stroop test can be combined with other cognitive instruments to ensure greater approximation of results with reality measures.

Indexed as

deep brain stimulationParkinson’s diseaseStroop test

Identifiers

PMID36591546
PMCPMC9776780
OpenAlexW4313454783

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.