Cargando…

Computer-based assessment of unilateral spatial neglect: A systematic review

BACKGROUND: To date, no gold standard exists for the assessment of unilateral spatial neglect (USN), a common post-stroke cognitive impairment, with limited sensitivity provided by currently used clinical assessments. Extensive research has shown that computer-based (CB) assessment can be more sensi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Giannakou, Ioanna, Lin, Dan, Punt, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9437703/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36061603
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2022.912626
_version_ 1784781676929351680
author Giannakou, Ioanna
Lin, Dan
Punt, David
author_facet Giannakou, Ioanna
Lin, Dan
Punt, David
author_sort Giannakou, Ioanna
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To date, no gold standard exists for the assessment of unilateral spatial neglect (USN), a common post-stroke cognitive impairment, with limited sensitivity provided by currently used clinical assessments. Extensive research has shown that computer-based (CB) assessment can be more sensitive, but these have not been adopted by stroke services yet. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review providing an overview of existing CB tests for USN to identify knowledge gaps and positive/negative aspects of different methods. This review also investigated the benefits and barriers of introducing CB assessment tasks to clinical settings and explored practical implications for optimizing future designs. METHODOLOGY: We included studies that investigated the efficacy of CB neglect assessment tasks compared to conventional methods in detecting USN for adults with brain damage. Study identification was conducted through electronic database searches (e.g., Scopus), using keywords and standardized terms combinations, without date limitation (last search: 08/06/2022). Literature review and study selection were based on prespecified inclusion criteria. The quality of studies was assessed with the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies tool (Quadas-2). Data synthesis included a narrative synthesis, a table summarizing the evidence, and vote counting analysis based on a direction of effect plot. RESULTS: A total of 28 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. According to our results, 13/28 studies explored CB versions of conventional tasks, 11/28 involved visual search tasks, and 5/28 other types of tasks. The vote counting analysis revealed that 17/28 studies found CB tasks had either equal or higher sensitivity than conventional methods and positive correlation with conventional methods (15/28 studies). Finally, 20/28 studies showed CB tasks effectively detected patients with USN within different patient groups and control groups (17/28). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review provide practical implications for the implementation of CB assessment in the future, offering important information to enhance a variety of methodological issues. The study adds to our understanding of using CB tasks for USN assessment, exploring their efficacy and benefits compared to conventional methods, and considers their adoption in clinical environments.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9437703
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94377032022-09-03 Computer-based assessment of unilateral spatial neglect: A systematic review Giannakou, Ioanna Lin, Dan Punt, David Front Neurosci Neuroscience BACKGROUND: To date, no gold standard exists for the assessment of unilateral spatial neglect (USN), a common post-stroke cognitive impairment, with limited sensitivity provided by currently used clinical assessments. Extensive research has shown that computer-based (CB) assessment can be more sensitive, but these have not been adopted by stroke services yet. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review providing an overview of existing CB tests for USN to identify knowledge gaps and positive/negative aspects of different methods. This review also investigated the benefits and barriers of introducing CB assessment tasks to clinical settings and explored practical implications for optimizing future designs. METHODOLOGY: We included studies that investigated the efficacy of CB neglect assessment tasks compared to conventional methods in detecting USN for adults with brain damage. Study identification was conducted through electronic database searches (e.g., Scopus), using keywords and standardized terms combinations, without date limitation (last search: 08/06/2022). Literature review and study selection were based on prespecified inclusion criteria. The quality of studies was assessed with the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies tool (Quadas-2). Data synthesis included a narrative synthesis, a table summarizing the evidence, and vote counting analysis based on a direction of effect plot. RESULTS: A total of 28 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. According to our results, 13/28 studies explored CB versions of conventional tasks, 11/28 involved visual search tasks, and 5/28 other types of tasks. The vote counting analysis revealed that 17/28 studies found CB tasks had either equal or higher sensitivity than conventional methods and positive correlation with conventional methods (15/28 studies). Finally, 20/28 studies showed CB tasks effectively detected patients with USN within different patient groups and control groups (17/28). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review provide practical implications for the implementation of CB assessment in the future, offering important information to enhance a variety of methodological issues. The study adds to our understanding of using CB tasks for USN assessment, exploring their efficacy and benefits compared to conventional methods, and considers their adoption in clinical environments. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-08-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9437703/ /pubmed/36061603 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2022.912626 Text en Copyright © 2022 Giannakou, Lin and Punt. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Giannakou, Ioanna
Lin, Dan
Punt, David
Computer-based assessment of unilateral spatial neglect: A systematic review
title Computer-based assessment of unilateral spatial neglect: A systematic review
title_full Computer-based assessment of unilateral spatial neglect: A systematic review
title_fullStr Computer-based assessment of unilateral spatial neglect: A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Computer-based assessment of unilateral spatial neglect: A systematic review
title_short Computer-based assessment of unilateral spatial neglect: A systematic review
title_sort computer-based assessment of unilateral spatial neglect: a systematic review
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9437703/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36061603
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2022.912626
work_keys_str_mv AT giannakouioanna computerbasedassessmentofunilateralspatialneglectasystematicreview
AT lindan computerbasedassessmentofunilateralspatialneglectasystematicreview
AT puntdavid computerbasedassessmentofunilateralspatialneglectasystematicreview