Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Screening for cognitive impairment after stroke: A systematic review of psychometric properties and clinical utility
Burton L, Tyson SF.. Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 2015-03-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Objective To systematically review the psychometric properties and clinical utility of cognitive screening tools post-stroke. Data sources EMBASE, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsychInfo. Study selection Studies testing the accuracy of screening tools for cognitive impairment after stroke.
Key findings
- Data sources EMBASE, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsychInfo.
- Study selection Studies testing the accuracy of screening tools for cognitive impairment after stroke.
- Data extraction Data regarding the participants, selection criteria, criterion/reference measure, cut-off score, sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predicted values for the selected tools were extracted.
- Tools with sensitivity ≥ 80% and specificity ≥ 60% were selected.
Why it matters
This systematic review examined the psychometric properties and clinical utility of cognitive screening tools after stroke. It is about screening for cognitive impairment after stroke and does not test any treatment, so it says nothing about curing or preventing Alzheimer's disease.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 52/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a systematic review of all the studies on the question. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and studied in people because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of rehabilitation medicine) |
| Journal's citation record | 1 / 4 | Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine: journal h-index 148 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A systematic review of all the studies on the question (from PubMed type “Systematic Review”) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2015 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | A review of other studies — randomisation is not credited here |
| Times cited | 5 / 7 | Cited 192 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 3 / 5 | 14.8 citations a year over 13 year(s) since 2015 |
| Impact for its field and year | 2 / 6 | Cited 1.3× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 2 / 6 | Cited by 3 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 3 / 4 | Cited 53 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 2 / 4 | Last-listed author Sarah F. Tyson: h-index 44 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 1 / 3 | University of Manchester: institution h-index 1,304 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 0 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete) |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 25590458) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Total | 52 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
- DOI: 10.2340/16501977-1930
- PubMed: 25590458
- Original source →
- Free full text: Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine →
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Burton, L., & Tyson, S. F. (2015). Screening for cognitive impairment after stroke: A systematic review of psychometric properties and clinical utility. Journal of rehabilitation medicine. https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-1930
Vancouver
Burton L, Tyson SF. Screening for cognitive impairment after stroke: A systematic review of psychometric properties and clinical utility. Journal of rehabilitation medicine. 2015. doi:10.2340/16501977-1930. PMID: 25590458.
BibTeX
@article{burton2015-25590458,
author = {Burton, L. and Tyson, S. F.},
title = {{Screening for cognitive impairment after stroke: A systematic review of psychometric properties and clinical utility}},
journal = {Journal of rehabilitation medicine},
year = {2015},
doi = {10.2340/16501977-1930},
pmid = {25590458},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-1930}
}
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Later studies that cite this one
3 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.
Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment
Also tagged “assessment”
840 studies in the library carry the topic tag “assessment”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 840 tagged studies.