MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004837161 · doi:10.1111/1440-1630.12024

Stroke‐specific executive function assessment: A literature review of performance‐based tools

2013· review· en· W2004837161 on OpenAlex
Valérie Poulin, Nicol Korner‐Bitensky, Deirdre Dawson

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Occupational Therapy Journal · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalHeart and Stroke FoundationToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoMcGill UniversityCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyRehabilitationStroke (engine)Clinical psychologyFace validityOccupational therapyPsychometricsCronbach's alphaPhysical medicine and rehabilitationReliability (semiconductor)MedicinePhysical therapyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/AIM: Executive function should be an integral component of post-stroke assessment. However, a Canada-wide survey of occupational therapists on stroke rehabilitation practices found a rare use of executive function assessments. Performance-based executive function assessments that closely reflect real-world activities are useful in identifying individuals who will face difficulties when returning to home and community activities. To increase clinicians' awareness of these tools, a literature review was conducted to identify performance-based measures of executive function and their stroke-specific psychometric properties. METHODS: The review identified 17 performance-based tools and 41 studies that reported their psychometric properties specific to stroke. Each tool was critically appraised according to the executive function components assessed, the level of functioning assessed (i.e. impairment, activity or participation), the environment within which the assessment is conducted and the tool's psychometric properties and clinical utility. Standard criteria were used to evaluate the tools' psychometric properties. The findings were compiled in a Stroke-Specific Executive Function Toolkit. RESULTS: The assessments that demonstrated the strongest evidence of reliability and validity were the Executive Function Performance Test, the Multiple Errands Test and the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills. Only the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills has been adequately evaluated for its ability to detect change. In terms of clinical utility, the Kettle Test has the shortest administration time (i.e. less than 20 minutes) and requires limited equipment. CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY: The Stroke-Specific Executive Function Toolkit provides clinicians with useful information that should facilitate identification of appropriate executive function tools for use across the continuum of stroke care.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.152
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it