Early cognitive and emotional outcome after stroke is independent of discharge destination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Cognitive and emotional problems occur frequently after stroke. Patients with minor stroke are more likely to be discharged home. This paper compares early cognitive and emotional outcomes in patients discharged home after stroke versus patients discharged to inpatient rehabilitation, and examines the effect of cognitive and emotional outcomes on long-term participation. METHODS: In this multicenter prospective cohort study, patients with stroke were assessed at two months with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Checklist for Cognitive and Emotional Consequences following Stroke (CLCE-24) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). One year post stroke, participation was assessed with the Restriction subscale of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-Participation (USER-P Restriction). RESULTS: The study included 332 patients. Two months post stroke, anxiety and cognitive problems were equally prevalent among patients discharged home (n = 243; 73%) and patients discharged to inpatient rehabilitation (n = 89; 27%) (HADS-A = 4.8 ± 3.9 versus 4.6 ± 4.0, p = 0.747; MoCA < 26: 66.7% versus 70.8%, p = 0.477; CLCE-cognition = 3.0 ± 2.9 versus 3.3 ± 2.8, p = 0.499). Depressive symptoms were less severe in patients discharged home (HADS-D = 4.3 ± 3.9 versus 5.5 ± 3.8, p = 0.010). In patients discharged home, cognitive complaints were predictive of long-term participation (B = - 2.03; 95% CI - 3.15, - 0.90), while cognitive or emotional outcomes were not predictive in patients discharged to inpatient rehabilitation. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive and emotional problems at two months post stroke were comparable between patients discharged home and those discharged to inpatient rehabilitation. For patients discharged home, cognitive complaints were predictive of long-term participation.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".