ArticleBrain and behavior2026
IQCODE-Brief Version in Stroke Patients.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2026. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPost-stroke cognitive impairment is frequently seen after stroke. We aimed to examine the psychometric properties, factorial structure, and screening utility of the IQCODE brief version in stroke patients using an informant-based approach to cognitive impairment screening.
methodsPatients aged older than 18 years with ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke were included. Within one week of completing the MoCA test, each patient's informant (spouse, caregiver, etc.) was contacted by phone, and the IQCODE brief version was administered. Cronbach's alpha, test-retest analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were performed to assess the reliability and construct validity of the IQCODE brief version.
resultsA total of 179 patients with stroke (mean age: 58.6 ± 13.7 years) were included, 18 (10%) of them had hemorrhagic stroke. The IQCODE brief version demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.94). Factor analysis suggested a preliminary four-factor structure, explaining 76.5% of the total variance. CFA confirmed a good model fit (RMSEA = 0.07, CFI = 0.973, TLI = 0.964). Review of the factor loadings resulted in the exclusion of three items from the initial model. ROC analysis for the 16-item version yielded an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.771 (95% CI, 0.70 - 0.84), with an optimal cut-off score of 48.5 (sensitivity: 72.4%; specificity: 71.1%). A refined 13-item version demonstrated improved specificity (76%) without compromising sensitivity.
conclusionsBoth the 16-item and the proposed 13-item IQCODE brief versions demonstrated promising preliminary psychometric properties, and they may serve as effective screening tools. Their feasibility for telephone administration and strong psychometric properties support their use in routine clinical practice and remote screening.
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.