Cited by 66Cognitive Functions and MemoryStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryHistorical and Modern Theater Studies

A virtual shopping task for the assessment of executive functions: Validity for people with stroke

Nir-Hadad, Shira Yama, Weiss, Patrice L., Waizman, Anna, Schwartz, Natalia, Kizony, Rachel·2017·Neuropsychological Rehabilitation

Abstract

The importance of assessing executive functions (EF) using ecologically valid assessments has been discussed extensively. Due to the difficulty of carrying out such assessments in real-world settings on a regular basis, virtual reality has been proposed as a technique to provide complex functional tasks under a variety of differing conditions while measuring various aspects of performance and controlling for stimuli. The main goal of this study was to examine the discriminant, construct-convergent and ecological validity of the Adapted Four-Item Shopping Task, an assessment of the Instrumental Activity of Daily Living (IADL) of shopping. Nineteen people with stroke, aged 50-85 years, and 20 age- and gender-matched healthy participants performed the shopping task in both the SeeMe Virtual Interactive Shopping environment and a real shopping environment (the hospital cafeteria) in a counterbalanced order. The shopping task outcomes were compared to clinical measures of EF. The findings provided good initial support for the validity of the Adapted Four-Item Shopping Task as an IADL assessment that requires the use of EF for people with stroke. Further studies should examine this task with a larger sample of people with stroke as well as with other populations who have deficits in EF.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09602011.2015.1109523

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 64 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nir-Hadad, S. Y., Weiss, P. L., Waizman, A., Schwartz, N., & Kizony, R.
Affiliations
  • Sheba Medical Center (IL)
  • University of Haifa (IL)
Corresponding author
Kizony, Rachel
Venue
Neuropsychological Rehabilitation
Published
2015-11-11
Volume
27
Issue
5
Pages
808-833
ISSN
  • 0960-2011 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0694
OpenAlex
W2146674601
Cited by
66
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 1
FWCI
5.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuropsychological Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • The Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute Of Gerontology & Human Development and Eshel, the Association the Planning and Development of Services for the Aged in Israel. (NA)
  • Fonds de la recherché en santé du Québec (FRSQ) Strategic Development Project (NA)
  • Ian Karten Charitable Trust under Grant (NA)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
Keywords
executive function, stroke, virtual reality, instrumental activities of daily living, ecological validity, construct validity, discriminant validity, functional assessment
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cognition Disorders, Environment, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Status Schedule, Middle Aged, Psychomotor Performance, Surveys and Questionnaires, User-Computer Interface, Case-Control Studies, Statistics, Nonparametric, Stroke, Executive Function

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