Maria Shendyapina1, Ekaterina Kuzmina2, Sergey Kazymaev3, Anna Petrova1, Nele Demeyere4, Brendan S Weekes5. 1. Laboratory for Communication Science and Faculty of Education. 2. Center for Multilingualism in Society across the Lifespan, Faculty of Humanities, University of Oslo. 3. Department of Neurorehabilitation, Treatment and Rehabilitation Center of the Ministry of Healthcare of Russia, Moscow, Russian Federation. 4. Department of Experimental Psychology, Cognitive Neuropsychology Centre, University of Oxford. 5. Laboratory for Communication Science, Faculty of Education, University of Hong Kong.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS) is a screening tool for the assessment of poststroke deficits in attention, memory, praxis, language, and number processing. The goal of the present study was to develop a Russian version of the OCS (Rus-OCS) via translation of the original battery, its cultural and linguistic adaptations, and reporting preliminary findings on its psychometric properties. METHOD: All parts of OCS were translated by native Russian-speaking neuropsychologists. Russian-speaking stroke patients (N = 205) were assessed with the Rus-OCS. Their performance was compared with performance of 60 healthy Russian-speaking adults aged between the ages of 18 and 91 years. The performance of 15 stroke patients and 42 healthy adults were assessed with a parallel version within 7 days of first testing. Convergent validity of the Rus-OCS was established via correlations with comparable tasks. Performance of three stroke groups with different lesion lateralization (right, left, and bilateral) was compared on language and visual attention subtasks. Preliminary normative data based on 5th to 95th percentile were also reported. RESULTS: Measures of internal consistency and test-retest reliability ranged from acceptable to very good and estimates of convergent validity ranged from moderate to high. Sensitivity and specificity was found to range from .56 to 1 and from .73 to 1, respectively. Significant differences in performance between stroke and healthy groups on all subtasks confirmed the discriminative power of the Rus-OCS was good. CONCLUSIONS: Rus-OCS is a promising cognitive screening instrument for Russian-speaking patients. However, further validation is needed. Constraints of socioeconomic differences between Russian speakers in the wider population should be considered. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
OBJECTIVE: The Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS) is a screening tool for the assessment of poststroke deficits in attention, memory, praxis, language, and number processing. The goal of the present study was to develop a Russian version of the OCS (Rus-OCS) via translation of the original battery, its cultural and linguistic adaptations, and reporting preliminary findings on its psychometric properties. METHOD: All parts of OCS were translated by native Russian-speaking neuropsychologists. Russian-speaking strokepatients (N = 205) were assessed with the Rus-OCS. Their performance was compared with performance of 60 healthy Russian-speaking adults aged between the ages of 18 and 91 years. The performance of 15 strokepatients and 42 healthy adults were assessed with a parallel version within 7 days of first testing. Convergent validity of the Rus-OCS was established via correlations with comparable tasks. Performance of three stroke groups with different lesion lateralization (right, left, and bilateral) was compared on language and visual attention subtasks. Preliminary normative data based on 5th to 95th percentile were also reported. RESULTS: Measures of internal consistency and test-retest reliability ranged from acceptable to very good and estimates of convergent validity ranged from moderate to high. Sensitivity and specificity was found to range from .56 to 1 and from .73 to 1, respectively. Significant differences in performance between stroke and healthy groups on all subtasks confirmed the discriminative power of the Rus-OCS was good. CONCLUSIONS: Rus-OCS is a promising cognitive screening instrument for Russian-speaking patients. However, further validation is needed. Constraints of socioeconomic differences between Russian speakers in the wider population should be considered. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
Authors: Terence J Quinn; Edo Richard; Yvonne Teuschl; Thomas Gattringer; Melanie Hafdi; John T O'Brien; Niamh Merriman; Celine Gillebert; Hanne Huyglier; Ana Verdelho; Reinhold Schmidt; Emma Ghaziani; Hysse Forchammer; Sarah T Pendlebury; Rose Bruffaerts; Milija Mijajlovic; Bogna A Drozdowska; Emily Ball; Hugh S Markus Journal: Eur Stroke J Date: 2021-10-08
Authors: Nele Demeyere; Owen A Williams; Elise Milosevich; Evangeline G Chiu; Bogna A Drozdowska; Avril Dillon; Helen Dawes; Shirley Thomas; Annapoorna Kuppuswamy; Sarah T Pendlebury; Terence J Quinn Journal: Eur Stroke J Date: 2021-10-26