Inclusion of People With Aphasia in Stroke Trials: A Systematic Search and Review.
Although people with aphasia (PwA) represent 30% of stroke survivors, they are frequently excluded from stroke research, or their inclusion is unclear. Such practice significantly limits the generalizability of stroke research, increases the need to duplicate research in aphasia-specific populations...
| Publicado en: | Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Vol. 105; no. 3; pp. 580 - 593 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
| Formato: | research systematic review Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
W B Saunders
Mar2024
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=175636936&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 175636936 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 00039993 1XL jtl: Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation issn: 00039993 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Mar2024 vid: 105 iid: 3 pid: 1351 pub: W B Saunders place: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania artinfo: ui: 175636936 175636936 175636936 10.1016/j.apmr.2023.06.010 175636936 ppf: 580 ppct: 13 formats: tig: atl: Inclusion of People With Aphasia in Stroke Trials: A Systematic Search and Review. aug: au: Shiggins, Ciara Ryan, Brooke Dewan, Farhana Bernhardt, Julie O'Halloran, Robyn Power, Emma Lindley, Richard I. McGurk, Gordon Rose, Miranda L. affil: National Health and Medical Research Council Centre of Research Excellence in Aphasia Recovery and Rehabilitation, Australia sug: subj: Aphasia Stroke Stroke Patients Research, Medical Research Subject Recruitment Human Systematic Review Research Subject Retention Descriptive Statistics Cognition ab: Although people with aphasia (PwA) represent 30% of stroke survivors, they are frequently excluded from stroke research, or their inclusion is unclear. Such practice significantly limits the generalizability of stroke research, increases the need to duplicate research in aphasia-specific populations, and raises important ethical and human rights issues. To detail the extent and nature of inclusion of PwA in contemporary stroke randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We conducted a systematic search to identify completed stroke RCTs and RCT protocols published in 2019. Web of Science was searched using terms "stroke" and "randomized controlled trial". These articles were reviewed by extracting rates of PwA inclusion/exclusion, whether "aphasia" or related terms were referred to in the article or supplemental files, eligibility criteria, consent procedures, adaptations made to support the inclusion of PwA, and attrition rates of PwA. Data were summarized, and descriptive statistics applied when appropriate. 271 studies comprising 215 completed RCTs and 56 protocols were included. 36.2% of included studies referred to aphasia/dysphasia. Of completed RCTs, only 6.5% explicitly included PwA, 4.7% explicitly excluded PwA, and inclusion was unclear in the remaining 88.8%. Among RCT protocols, 28.6% of studies intended inclusion, 10.7% intended excluding PwA, and in 60.7%, inclusion was unclear. In 45.8% of included studies, sub-groups of PwA were excluded, either explicitly (ie, particular types/severities of aphasia, eg, global aphasia) or implicitly, by way of ambiguous eligibility criteria which could potentially relate to a sub-group of PwA. Little rationale for exclusion was provided. 71.2% of completed RCTs did not report any adaptations that could support the inclusion of PwA, and minimal information was provided about consent procedures. Where it could be determined, attrition of PwA averaged 10% (range 0%-20%). This paper details the extent of inclusion of PwA in stroke research and highlights opportunities for improvement. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research systematic review Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|