Long-term psychological outcomes following stroke: the OX-CHRONIC study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Stroke survivors rate longer-term (> 2 years) psychological recovery as their top priority, but data on how frequently psychological consequences occur is lacking. Prevalence of cognitive impairment, depression/anxiety, fatigue, apathy and related psychological outcomes, and whether rates are stable in long-term stroke, is unknown. METHODS: N = 105 long-term stroke survivors (M [SD] age = 72.92 [13.01]; M [SD] acute NIH Stroke Severity Score = 7.39 [6.25]; 59.0% Male; M [SD] years post-stroke = 4.57 [2.12]) were recruited (potential N = 208). Participants completed 3 remote assessments, including a comprehensive set of standardized cognitive neuropsychological tests comprising domains of memory, attention, language, and executive function, and questionnaires on emotional distress, fatigue, apathy and other psychological outcomes. Ninety participants were re-assessed one year later. Stability of outcomes was assessed by Cohen's d effect size estimates and percent Minimal Clinically Important Difference changes between time points. RESULTS: On the Montreal Cognitive Assessment 65.3% scored < 26. On the Oxford Cognitive Screen 45.9% had at least one cognitive impairment. Attention (27.1%) and executive function (40%) were most frequently impaired. 23.5% and 22.5% had elevated depression/anxiety respectively. Fatigue (51.4%) and apathy (40.5%) rates remained high, comparable to estimates in the first-year post-stroke. Attention (d = -0.12; 85.8% stable) and depression (d = 0.09, 77.1% stable) were the most stable outcomes. Following alpha-adjustments, only perceptuomotor abilities (d = 0.69; 40.4% decline) and fatigue (d = -0.33; 45.3% decline) worsened over one year. Cognitive impairment, depression/anxiety, fatigue and apathy all correlated with worse quality of life. CONCLUSION: Nearly half of participants > 2 years post-event exhibited psychological difficulties including domains of cognition, mood, and fatigue, which impact long-term quality of life. Stroke is a chronic condition with highly prevalent psychological needs, which require monitoring and intervention development.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".