Novel therapies for post-stroke cognitive impairment: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Stroke impacts 15 million people annually, ranking as the second-leading cause of mortality and the third-leading cause of disability globally. Despite advances in acute care, long-term cognitive impairments persist in 30-70% of survivors, impeding rehabilitation and increasing dependency. The existing treatments for post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI) show limited efficacy, underscoring the need for more comprehensive approaches. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the effectiveness of novel therapeutic interventions for PSCI. Methods: The present systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines and has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024621445). A comprehensive search in PubMed and EMBASE identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the past 5 years examining PSCI interventions, with the selection criterion being an assessment of the trials using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Statistical analyses included pooled mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), heterogeneity assessment, and subgroup analyses. Results: Of 755 identified articles, 22 RCTs involving 5,100 participants met the inclusion criteria. The results demonstrated that brain stimulation therapies, particularly transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS; MD 4.56, 95% CI: 3.19-5.93) and pharmacological interventions (MD 4.00, 95% CI: 3.48-4.52) exhibited significant benefits. Acupuncture showed potential benefits (MD 2.65, 95% CI: 1.07-4.23), albeit with considerable variability. Training approaches yielded mixed outcomes (MD 1.53, 95% CI: -0.09-3.15). Early interventions (within 3 months post-stroke) were the most effective. Discussion: Brain stimulation, especially tDCS, resulted in consistent cognitive benefits, with early initiation enhancing outcomes. Pharmacotherapy demonstrated robust, generalizable results, while cognitive training showed small but reliable effects. Acupuncture and physical training hold potential but require further standardization. Conclusion: Effective stroke rehabilitation requires a multimodal, personalized approach integrating brain stimulation, pharmacotherapy, and cognitive training. Early intervention is critical for maximizing neuroplasticity, the effect of later interventions needs further evaluation. Standardization is needed to optimize physical training and alternative medicine. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42024621445.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".