Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40409971›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2025

How do we measure dysarthria after stroke? A systematic review to guide the core outcome set for dysarthria.

Claire Mitchell, Sabrina El Kouaissi, Martha Duncan-Zaleski, Audrey Bowen, Paul Conroy, Brooke-Mai Whelan, Sarah J Jane Wallace, Joshua Cheyne, Jamie J Kirkham

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Observational
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

9 authors.

Claire MitchellDivision of Psychology, Communication and Human Neuroscience, School of Health Sciences & Geoffrey Jefferson Brain Research Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK claire.mitchell@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2445-8468
Sabrina El KouaissiDivision of Psychology, Communication and Human Neuroscience, School of Health Sciences & Geoffrey Jefferson Brain Research Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Martha Duncan-ZaleskiDivision of Psychology, Communication and Human Neuroscience, School of Health Sciences & Geoffrey Jefferson Brain Research Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Audrey BowenManchester Centre for Health Psychology, School of Health Sciences & Geoffrey Jefferson Brain Research Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4075-1215
Paul ConroySchool of Linguistic, Speech and Communication Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Brooke-Mai WhelanSchool of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Sarah J Jane WallaceSchool of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0600-9343
Joshua CheyneLibrary Services, University of the West of Scotland, Paisley, Renfrewshire, UK.
Jamie J KirkhamDepartment of Biostatistics, Manchester University, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2579-9325

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesA consensus study to establish a Core Outcome Set for dysarthria after stroke identified four key outcome domains that should be measured in research and clinical practice: (1) intelligibility of speech, (2) ability to participate in conversations, (3) living well with dysarthria and (4) communication partners skills and knowledge (where relevant). This review aimed to systematically identify corresponding measurement instruments and to examine their clinical utility and psychometric properties.

designSystematic review conducted in alignment with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycInfo and Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, Linguistics and Language Behavioral Abstracts (LLBA). Major trials registers: WHO ICTRP, ISRCTN registry and ClinicalTrials.gov searched March 2024. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We included trials that developed or used measurement instruments for poststroke dysarthria. We identified studies that could be included in an update of the Cochrane systematic review of interventions for non-progressive dysarthria to identify what measurement instruments were used in therapy trials for poststroke dysarthria. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Records were screened independently by three authors. Psychometric data were extracted, by two authors, from included studies and methodological quality was evaluated using Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) and Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) guidance. Assessment of clinical utility followed Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) guidance.

resultsFollowing screening, 19 publications reporting 12 measurement instruments were identified. According to COSMIN standards, all 19 publications were rated as having low, very low or unknown quality of evidence. Three measurement instruments were identified as having the most relevant clinical utility to the population, the highest quality of evidence and had the potential to measure some specific aspects from three of the four agreed domains, intelligibility, conversations and living well with dysarthria from the patient and clinician perspective. These were the Frenchay Dysarthria Assessment II, the Communication Outcomes After Stroke Scale and the Therapy Outcome Measures for Dysarthria.

conclusionsThis review provides a comprehensive overview and appraisal of dysarthria measurement instruments to align with a Core Outcome Set. We only included English language-based measurement instruments. Many dysarthria measurement instruments were developed for non-stroke populations, including progressive dysarthria, with limited psychometric data for stroke. Measurement instruments with uncertain quality of evidence can still be considered for inclusion with a Core Outcome Set and three have been suggested. There is a need for further psychometric testing of these and the development of new measurement instruments to cover all aspects of intelligibility, conversations, living well with dysarthria and communication partner skills. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022302998.

Indexed as

DysarthriaOutcome Assessment, Health CareStrokeHumansPsychometricsSpeech IntelligibilityStroke RehabilitationREHABILITATION MEDICINEStrokeSystematic Review

Identifiers

PMID40409971
PMCPMC12104885

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.