167Prevalence of Cognitive Impairment no Dementia (CIND) Post-Stroke: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Sexton, Eithne; Merriman, Niamh A.; McLoughlin, Affraic; Donnelly, Nora-Ann; Rohde, Daniela; Williams, David; Hickey, Anne; Bennett, Kathleen

doi:10.1093/ageing/afy140.125

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…11 The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews in September 2016 (registration number: CRD42016047840). 12…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…18 Reasons for heterogeneity were explored using stratified meta-analysis. Per protocol, 12 stratified meta-analysis was carried out based on the following groups: casemix (stroke type, inclusion of recurrent stroke and pre-stroke dementia), CIND definition; and setting (hospital V community). In addition, we also examined heterogeneity on the basis of quality score quartile and year of data collection.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of cognitive impairment no dementia in the first year post-stroke

Sexton

McLoughlin

Williams

et al. 2019

European Stroke Journal

Self Cite

156

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Increasing attention is being paid to interventions for cognitive impairment (CI) post-stroke, including for CI that does not meet dementia criteria. The aim of this paper was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of cognitive impairment no dementia (CIND) within one year post-stroke. Patients and methods: Pubmed, EMBASE and PsychInfo were searched for papers published in English in 1995-2017. Included studies were population or hospital-based cohort studies for first-ever/recurrent stroke, assessing CIND using standardised criteria at 1-12 months post-stroke. Abstracts were screened, followed by full text review of potentially relevant articles. Data were extracted using a standard form, and study quality was appraised using the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool. A pooled prevalence of CIND with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was estimated using random-effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was measured using the I 2 statistic. Results: A total of 7000 abstracts were screened, followed by 1028 full text articles. Twenty-three articles were included in the systematic review, and 21 in the meta-analysis. The pooled CIND prevalence was 38% [95% CI ¼ 32-43%] (I 2 ¼92.5%, p < 0.01). Study quality emerged as one source of heterogeneity. The five studies with the highest quality scores had no heterogeneity (I 2 ¼0%, p ¼ 0.99), with a similar pooled prevalence (39%, 95%CI ¼ 35-42%). Other sources of heterogeneity were stroke type, inclusion of pre-stroke CI, and age at assessment time. Discussion and conclusion: Meta-analysis of available studies indicates that in the first year post-stroke, 4 in 10 patients display a level of cognitive impairment that does not meet the criteria for dementia.

show abstract

“…11 The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews in September 2016 (registration number: CRD42016047840). 12…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%