Principal Component Analysis of Oxford Cognitive Screen in Patients With Stroke (original) (raw)

Abstract

Cognitive deficits occur in most patients with stroke and are the important predictors of adverse long-term outcome. Early identification is fundamental to plan the most appropriate care, including rehabilitation and discharge decisions. The Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS) is a simple, valid, and reliable tool for the assessment of cognitive deficits in patients with stroke. It contains 10 subtests, providing 14 scores referring to 5 theoretically derived cognitive domains: attention, language, number, praxis, and memory. However, an empirical verification of the domain composition of the OCS subtests in stroke data is still lacking in the literature. A principal component analysis (PCA) was performed on 1,973 patients with stroke who were enrolled in OCS studies in the UK and in Italy. A number of six main components were identified relating to the domains of language and arithmetic, memory, visuomotor ability, orientation, spatial exploration, and executive functions. Bootstrapped s...

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (28)

  1. Nys GM, van Zandvoort MJ, de Kort PL, Jansen BP, de Haan EH, Kappelle LJ. Cognitive disorders in acute stroke: prevalence and clinical determinants. Cerebrovasc Dis. (2007) 23:408-16. doi: 10.1159/0001 01464
  2. Miller EL, Murray L, Richards L, Zorowitz RD, Bakas T, Clark P, et al. American Heart Association on Cardiovascular Nursing and the Stroke Council. Comprehensive overview of nursing and interdisciplinary rehabilitation care of the stroke patient: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Stroke. (2010) 41:2402-48. doi: 10.1161/STR.0b013e3181e7512b
  3. Mancuso M, Varalta V, Sardella L, Capitani D, Zoccolotti P, Antonucci G. The Italian OCS Group. Italian normative data for a stroke specific cognitive screening tool: the Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS). Neurol Sci. (2016) 37:1713-21. doi: 10.1007/s10072-016-2650-6
  4. Demeyere N, Riddoch MJ, Slavkova ED, Bickerton WL, Humphreys GW. The Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS): validation of a stroke-specific short cognitive screening tool. Psychol Assess. (2015) 27:883-94. doi: 10.1037/pas00 00082
  5. Demeyere N, Riddoch MJ, Slavkova ED, Jones K, Reckless I, Mathieson P, et al. Domain-specific versus generalized cognitive screening in acute stroke. J Neurol. (2016) 263:306-15. doi: 10.1007/s00415-015- 7964-4
  6. Mancuso M, Demeyere N, Abbruzzese L, Damora A, Varalta V, Pirrotta F, et al. and the Italian OCS Group. Using the Oxford Cognitive Screen to Detect Cognitive Impairment in Stroke Patients: A Comparison with the Mini-Mental State Examination. Front Neurol. (2018) 9:101. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00101
  7. Valera-Gran D, López-Roig S, Hurtado-Pomares M, Peral-Gómez P, García-Manzanares, M, et al. Validation of the Spanish version of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (S-OCS): psychometric properties of a short cognitive stroke-specific screening tool. Clin. Rehabil. (2019) 33 724- 36. doi: 10.1177/0269215518819046
  8. Ramos CCF, Amado DK, Borges CR, Bergamaschi E, Nitrini R, Brucki SMD. Oxford Cognitive Screen -Brazilian Portuguese version (OCS-Br) a pilot study. Dement Neuropsychol. (2018) 12:427-31. doi: 10.1590/1980-57642018dn12-040014
  9. Hong WJ, Tao J, Wong AWK, Yang SL, Leung MT, Lee TMC, et al. Psychometric properties of the Chinese (Putonghua) version of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS-P) in Subacute poststroke patients without neglect. Biomed Res Int. (2018) 2018:6827854. doi: 10.1155/2018/6827854
  10. Huygelier H, Schraepen B, Demeyere N, Gillebert CR. The Dutch version of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS-NL): normative data and their association with age and socio-economic status. Aging Neuropsychol Cogn. (2020) 27:765- 86. doi: 10.1080/13825585.2019.1680598
  11. Shendyapina M, Kuzmina E, Kazymaev S, Petrova A, Demeyere N, Weekes BS. The Russian version of the Oxford Cognitive Screen: validation study on stroke survivors. Neuropsychology. (2019) 33:77-92. doi: 10.1037/neu00 00491 12. Robotham RJ, Riis JO, Demeyere N. A Danish version of the Oxford cognitive screen: a stroke-specific screening test as an alternative to the MoCA Aging. Neuropsychol Cogn. (2020) 27:52-65. doi: 10.1080/13825585.2019.15 77352
  12. Bisogno AL, Favaretto C, Zangrossi A, Monai E, Facchini S, De Pellegrin S, et al. A low-dimensional structure of neurological impairment in stroke. Brain Commun. (2021) 3:fcab119. doi: 10.1093/braincomms/ fcab119
  13. Corbetta M, Siegel JS, Shulman GL. On the low dimensionality of behavioral deficits and alterations of brain network connectivity after focal injury. Cortex. (2018) 107:229-37. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2017. 12.017
  14. Matano A, Iosa M, Guariglia C, Pizzamiglio L, Paolucci S. Does outcome of neuropsychological treatment in patients with unilateral spatial neglect after stroke affect functional outcome? Eur J Phys Rehab Med. (2015) 51:737-43.
  15. Moore MJ, Vancleef K, Riddoch MJ, Gillebert C, Demeyere N. Recovery of visuospatial neglect subtypes and relationship to functional outcome six months after stroke. Neurorehab. Neur. Rep. (2021) 35:823-35. doi: 10.1177/15459683211032977
  16. Peii C, Kimberly H, Yekyung K, Barrett AM. Impact of spatial neglect in stroke rehabilitation: evidence from the setting of an inpatient rehabilitation facility. Arch Phys Med Rehab. (2015) 96:1458-66. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2015. 03.019
  17. Kersey AJ, Wakim KM Li R, Cantlon JF. Developing, mature, and unique functions of the child's brain in reading and mathematics. Dev Cogn Neurosci. (2019) 39:100684. doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2019.100684
  18. Evans TM, Flowers DL, Luetje MM, Napoliello E, Eden, GF Functional neuroanatomy of arithmetic and word reading and its relationship to age. Neuroimage. (2016) 143:304-15. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.08.048
  19. Demeyere N, Sun S, Milosevich E, Vancleef K. Post-stroke cognition with the Oxford Cognitive Screen vs Montreal Cognitive Assessment: a multi- site randomized controlled study (OCS-CARE). AMRC Open Res. (2019) 1:12. doi: 10.12688/amrcopenres.12882.1
  20. Schönrock-Adema J, Heijne-Penninga M, Van Hell EA, Cohen-Schotanus J. Necessary steps in factor analysis: enhancing validation studies of educational instruments. The PHEEM applied to clerks as an example. Med Teach. (2009) 31:e226-32. doi: 10.1080/01421590802516756
  21. Dehaene S. Varieties of numerical abilities. Cognition. (1992) 44:1- 42. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(92)90049-N
  22. Dehaene S, Cohen L. Toward an anatomical and functional model of number processing. Math Cogn. (1995) 1:83-120.
  23. Dehaene S, Piazza M, Pinel P, Cohen L. Three parietal circuits for number processing. Cogn Neuropsychol. (2003) 20:487- 506. doi: 10.1080/02643290244000239
  24. Sim EJ, Helbig HB, Graf M, Kiefer M. When action observation facilitates visual perception: activation in visuo-motor areas contributes to object recognition. Cereb Cortex. (2015) 25:2907-18. doi: 10.1093/cercor/ bhu087
  25. Barrett Jones S, Miller LA, Kleitman S, Nikpour A, Lah S. Semantic and episodic memory in adults with temporal lobe epilepsy. Appl.
  26. Neuropsychol. Adult. (2021) 1-10. doi: 10.1080/23279095.2021.18 76692
  27. Cameron J, Worrall-Carter L, Page K, Stewart S, Ski CF. Screening for mild cognitive impairment in patients with heart failure: Montreal cognitive assessment versus mini mental state exam. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. (2013) 12:252-60. doi: 10.1177/14745151114 35606
  28. Iosa M, Guariglia C, Matano A, Paolucci S, Pizzamiglio L. Recovery of personal neglect. Eur J Phys Rehab Med. (2016) 52:791-8.