ArticleScientific reports2025
Validation of the dimensional apathy scale and predictors of apathy in stroke survivors.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The study aimed to: (i) translate and culturally adapt the DAS into Persian; (ii) examine the psychometric properties of both the DAS-S and DAS-I; (iii) analyze the three components of both the DAS-S and DAS-I to assess apathy dimensionally; (iv) determine the optimal cut-off points using ROC analysis for the DAS-S, DAS-I, and their subscales; and (v) identify predictors of initiation, emotional, and executive apathy in stroke survivors. This study included 115 stroke survivors and 38 healthy controls. Both DAS versions were evaluated for acceptability, reliability, and validity. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to assess construct validity. Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analysis was used to determine optimal cut-off points. Multiple regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of apathy. Cronbach's alpha was 0.88 for DAS-S and 0.85 for DAS-I. ICC2,1 was > 0.93 for both versions. Total and subscale scores of both DAS versions showed weak to moderate correlations with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Apathy subscale (r = 0.39-0.69). Principal component analysis showed three components (executive, emotional, and initiation) for DAS-S and DAS-I, explaining 49.26% and 53.02% of the variance, respectively. The optimal cut-off was 31 for DAS-S (88.89% sensitivity, 86.36% specificity) and 29 for DAS-I (92.52% sensitivity, 86.36% specificity). Depression was the strongest predictor of executive subscale scores of both DAS versions, as well as the initiation subscale of the DAS-S, explaining 33.90-48.90% of the variance. However, for the emotional subscale of both DAS versions, the strongest predictor was the level of daily activity. The two versions of DAS effectively identify apathy subtypes and are reliable and valid for assessing apathy in stroke survivors. They effectively discriminate between apathetic and non-apathetic stroke survivors. Depression is the strongest predictor of executive and initiation apathy, whereas functional indicators-particularly independence in activities of daily living-predict emotional apathy.
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.