Observational studyBMC neurology2021
Critical issue on the extinction and inattention subtest of NIHSS scale: an analysis on post-acute stroke patients attending inpatient rehabilitation.
Observational study in BMC neurology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03968627 (Development of a National, Evidence Based Protocol for Stroke Rehabilitation in a Multicenter Italian no Profit Institution), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Development of a National, Evidence Based Protocol for Stroke Rehabilitation in a Multicenter Italian no Profit Institution: Implementation and Results of a Pilot Study
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Attentional Deficit as the Primary Manifestation of an Isolated Midbrain Infarction.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Article
- Validation of the Vision Impairment Screening Assessment in acute stroke care: a prospective diagnostic accuracy study.European stroke journal · 2026Article
- Deep generative computed perfusion-deficit mapping of ischaemic stroke.Communications biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Low NIHSS score in large vessel occlusion stroke: optimal treatment and clinical controversies.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scoring inconsistencies between neurologists and emergency room nurses.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance of NIHSS extinction and inattention item, compared to the results of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS) heart subtest. Additionally, the possible role of the NIHSS visual field subtest on the NIHSS extinction and inattention subtest performance is explored and discussed.
methodsWe analysed scores on NIHSS extinction and inattention subtest, NIHSS visual field subtest, and OCS heart subtest on a sample of 118 post-stroke patients.
resultsCompared to OCS heart subtest, the results on NIHSS extinction and inattention subtest showed an accuracy of 72.9% and a moderate agreement level (Cohen's kappa = 0.404). Furthermore, a decrease in NIHSS accuracy detecting neglect (61.1%) was observed in patients with pathological scores in NIHSS visual field item.
conclusionsExtreme caution is recommended for the diagnostic performance of extinction and inattention item of NIHSS. Signs of neglect may not be detected by NIHSS, and may be confused with visual field impairment.
trial registrationThis study refers to an observational study protocol submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov with identifier: NCT03968627 . The name of the registry is "Development of a National Protocol for Stroke Rehabilitation in a Multicenter Italian Institution" and the date of the registration is the 30th May 2019.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.