Cited by 81Stroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementLong-Term Effects of COVID-19

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Psychosocial consequences of stroke: A long-term population-based follow-up

Teasdale, T. W., Engberg, A. W.·2005·Brain Injury

Abstract

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To investigate psychosocial status among nationally representative groups of stroke patients at long intervals post-stroke. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: From a Danish national register of hospitalizations, three representative groups of surviving patients were selected who had suffered a stroke 5, 10 and 15 years previously. A follow-up postal questionnaire was sent to them comprising items concerning symptomatology, functioning and social conditions, together with the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP). MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: Longer follow-up intervals were associated with younger age at stroke and better functioning at discharge. At follow-up, the majority of patients reported difficulties with attention, memory and emotional control, irrespective of follow-up interval. Return to employment, social relations and leisure activities were affected, but were comparatively better at longer follow-up intervals, as was self-rated functioning and several NHP symptom scales. However, multi-variate analyses suggest that these positive changes with time appear to be mediated by attrition related to age at stroke and discharge functioning rather than time since stroke itself. CONCLUSIONS: Symptomatology, functioning and social conditions remain affected and perhaps stagnant in long-term survivors of stroke.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02699050500110421

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Teasdale, T. W., & Engberg, A. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • Hvidovre Hospital (DK)
Corresponding author
Teasdale, T. W.
Venue
Brain Injury
Published
2005-12
Volume
19
Issue
12
Pages
1049-1058
ISSN
  • 0269-9052 (ISSN-L)
  • 1362-301X
OpenAlex
W2013188078
Cited by
81
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 5
FWCI
4.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Brain Injury (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Long-Term Effects of COVID-19
Keywords
stroke, long-term outcomes, psychosocial consequences, functional recovery, cognitive impairment, emotional control, return to work, interpersonal relationships, leisure, attrition, Nottingham Health Profile
MeSH terms
Stroke Rehabilitation, Age Factors, Aged, Aphasia, Disability Evaluation, Epidemiologic Methods, Female, Health Status Indicators, Hospitalization, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Length of Stay, Male, Middle Aged, Prognosis, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Stroke

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review