Ann Rehabil Med.  2025 Feb;49(1):5-14. 10.5535/arm.240099.

Validation of Korean Version of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (K-OCS), a Post Stroke-Specific Cognitive Screening Tool

• Cho E
• Choi S
• Demeyere N
• Kim R
• Lim I
• Kim M

• KMID: 2565454
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5535/arm.240099

Abstract

Objective
To establish and evaluate the validity of the recently developed Korean version of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (K-OCS), this study verified its reliability, validity, and diagnostic accuracy.
Methods
Between November 2021 and December 2023, we recruited 72 patients with stroke from our hospital who agreed to participate in the study. The patients were repeatedly tested using K-OCS by the same or different assessors to estimate inter- and intra-rater reliability. To demonstrate the validity and usability of K-OCS, the test results of screening tools currently used in clinical practice, including the Korean-Mini Mental State Examination and the Korean version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, were used in comparison analyses.
Results
The subtests of K-OCS demonstrated excellent inter-rater reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient [ICC]=0.914–0.998) and test–retest reliability (ICC=0.913–0.994). We found moderate-to-strong correlations for convergent validity for the subsets (r=0.378– 0.979, p<0.01), and low-to-moderate discriminant validity correlations. The optimal cut-offs estimated for the subtests of the K-OCS showed a good-to-high range of specificity (94.8%– 100%). The positive predictive value was 58.2%–100% and negative predictive value was 65.6%–98.4%. Sensitivity was estimated at 25.6%–86.9%.
Conclusion
The results of this study indicate that K-OCS is a reliable and valid tool for screening cognitive impairment in patients post-stroke.

Keyword

Oxford Cognitive Screen; Cognition; Stroke; Neuropsychological assessment; Validation

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1. Cognitive profile. OCS, Oxford Cognitive Screen.

• 

Reference

1. Pendlebury ST, Rothwell PM; Oxford Vascular Study. Incidence and prevalence of dementia associated with transient ischaemic attack and stroke: analysis of the population-based Oxford Vascular Study. Lancet Neurol. 2019; 18:248–58. DOI: 10.1016/s1474-4422(18)30442-3. PMID: 30784556.

2. Sexton E, McLoughlin A, Williams DJ, Merriman NA, Donnelly N, Rohde D, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of cognitive impairment no dementia in the first year post-stroke. Eur Stroke J. 2019; 4:160–71. DOI: 10.1177/2396987318825484. PMID: 31259264.

3. Patel M, Coshall C, Rudd AG, Wolfe CD. Natural history of cognitive impairment after stroke and factors associated with its recovery. Clin Rehabil. 2003; 17:158–66. DOI: 10.1191/0269215503cr596oa. PMID: 12625656.

4. El Husseini N, Katzan IL, Rost NS, Blake ML, Byun E, Pendlebury ST, American Heart Association Stroke Council; Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing; Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention; Council on Hypertension; Council on Lifestyle and Cardiometabolic Health, et al. Cognitive impairment after ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2023; 54:e272–91. DOI: 10.1161/str.0000000000000430. PMID: 37125534.

5. Royal College of Physicians. National clinical guideline for stroke, Fifth Edition 2016 [Internet]. Intercollegiate Stroke Working Party;2016 [cited 2020 Aug 3]. Available from: https://www.hse.ie/eng/about/who/cspd/ncps/stroke/resources/2016-national-clinical-guideline-for-stroke-5th-edition.pdf.

6. Living clinical guidelines for stroke management [Internet]. Stroke Foundation;2019 [cited 2020 Aug 3]. Available from: https://informme.org.au/en/Guidelines/Clinical-Guidelines-for-Stroke-Management.

7. Cramer SC, Richards LG, Bernhardt J, Duncan P. Cognitive deficits after stroke. Stroke. 2023; 54:5–9. DOI: 10.1161/strokeaha.122.041775. PMID: 36542073.

8. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975; 12:189–98. PMID: 1202204.

9. Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bédirian V, Charbonneau S, Whitehead V, Collin I, et al. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005; 53:695–9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x. PMID: 15817019.

10. Demeyere N, Riddoch MJ, Slavkova ED, Jones K, Reckless I, Mathieson P, et al. Domain-specific versus generalized cognitive screening in acute stroke. J Neurol. 2016; 263:306–15. DOI: 10.1007/s00415-015-7964-4. PMID: 26588918.

11. Mancuso M, Demeyere N, Abbruzzese L, Damora A, Varalta V, Pirrotta F, Italian OCS Group, et al. Using the Oxford Cognitive Screen to detect cognitive impairment in stroke patients: a comparison with the Mini-Mental State Examination. Front Neurol. 2018; 9:101. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00101. PMID: 29541055.

12. Elliott E, Drozdowska BA, Taylor-Rowan M, Shaw RC, Cuthbertson G, Quinn TJ. Who is classified as untestable on brief cognitive screens in an acute stroke setting? Diagnostics (Basel). 2019; 9:95. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics9030095. PMID: 31416176.

13. Demeyere N, Riddoch MJ, Slavkova ED, Bickerton WL, Humphreys GW. The Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS): validation of a stroke-specific short cognitive screening tool. Psychol Assess. 2015; 27:883–94. DOI: 10.1037/pas0000082. PMID: 25730165.

14. Mancuso M, Varalta V, Sardella L, Capitani D, Zoccolotti P, Antonucci G; Italian OCS Group. Italian normative data for a stroke specific cognitive screening tool: the Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS). Neurol Sci. 2016; 37:1713–21. DOI: 10.1007/s10072-016-2650-6. PMID: 27395388.

15. Kong AP, Lam PH, Ho DW, Lau JK, Humphreys GW, Riddoch J, et al. The Hong Kong version of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (HK-OCS): validation study for Cantonese-speaking chronic stroke survivors. Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn. 2016; 23:530–48. DOI: 10.1080/13825585.2015.1127321. PMID: 26702642.

16. Robotham RJ, Riis JO, Demeyere N. A Danish version of the Oxford Cognitive Screen: a stroke-specific screening test as an alternative to the MoCA. Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn. 2020; 27:52–65. DOI: 10.1080/13825585.2019.1577352. PMID: 30741100.

17. Shendyapina M, Kuzmina E, Kazymaev S, Petrova A, Demeyere N, Weekes BS. The Russian version of the Oxford Cognitive Screen: validation study on stroke survivors. Neuropsychology. 2019; 33:77–92. DOI: 10.1037/neu0000491. PMID: 30321040.

18. Valera-Gran D, López-Roig S, Hurtado-Pomares M, Peral-Gómez P, García-Manzanares M, Sunyer Catlla M, et al. Validation of the Spanish version of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (S-OCS): psychometric properties of a short cognitive stroke-specific screening tool. Clin Rehabil. 2019; 33:724–36. DOI: 10.1177/0269215518819046. PMID: 30563369.

19. Valério D, Almeida J, Demeyere N, Lima M, Nogueira J, Santana I. The European Portuguese version of the Oxford Cognitive Screening (OCS-Pt): a screening test for acute stroke patients. Neurol Sci. 2022; 43:3717–28. DOI: 10.1007/s10072-022-05880-9. PMID: 35028780.

20. Huygelier H, Schraepen B, Miatton M, Welkenhuyzen L, Michiels K, Note E, et al. The Dutch Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS-NL): psychometric properties in Flemish stroke survivors. Neurol Sci. 2022; 43:6349–58. DOI: 10.1007/s10072-022-06314-2. PMID: 35971043.

21. Sanctuary C, Hewitt L, Demeyere N, Kankkunen K, Oxenham DV, Simpson DB, et al. The Oxford Cognitive Screen for use with Australian people after stroke (OCS-AU): the adaptation process and determining cut scores for cognitive impairment using a cross-sectional normative study. Aust Occup Ther J. 2023; 70:73–85. PMID: 36047309.

22. Bormann T, Kaller CP, Kulyk C, Demeyere N, Weiller C. The German version of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (D-OCS): normative data and validation in acute stroke and a mixed neurological sample. J Neuropsychol. 2024; 18:377–90. DOI: 10.1111/jnp.12359. PMID: 38238970.

23. Cho E, Choi S, Demeyere N, Hwang SSS, Kim M. The Korean version of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (K-OCS) normative study. Ann Rehabil Med. 2024; 48:22–30. DOI: 10.5535/arm.23149. PMID: 38433006.

24. Kang Y, Park J, Yu KH, Lee BC. A reliability, validity, and normative study of the Korean-Montreal Cognitive Assessment (K-MoCA) as an instrument for screening of Vascular Cognitive Impairment (VCI). Korean J Clin Psychol. 2009; 28:549–62. DOI: 10.15842/kjcp.2009.28.2.013.

25. Kang Y, Na DL, Hahn S. A validity study on the Korean Mini-Mental State Examination (K-MMSE) in dementia patients. J Korean Neurol Assoc. 1997; 15:300–8.

26. Bickerton WL, Riddoch MJ, Samson D, Balani AB, Mistry B, Humphreys GW. Systematic assessment of apraxia and functional predictions from the Birmingham Cognitive Screen. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2012; 83:513–21. DOI: 10.1136/jnnp-2011-300968. PMID: 22383734.

27. Oh MS, Yu KH, Lee JH, Jung S, Ko IS, Shin JH, et al. Validity and reliability of a Korean version of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale. J Clin Neurol. 2012; 8:177–83. DOI: 10.3988/jcn.2012.8.3.177. PMID: 23091526.

28. Schenkenberg T, Bradford DC, Ajax ET. Line bisection and unilateral visual neglect in patients with neurologic impairment. Neurology. 1980; 30:509–17. DOI: 10.1212/wnl.30.5.509. PMID: 7189256.

29. Stineman MG, Shea JA, Jette A, Tassoni CJ, Ottenbacher KJ, Fiedler R, et al. The Functional Independence Measure: tests of scaling assumptions, structure, and reliability across 20 diverse impairment categories. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1996; 77:1101–8. DOI: 10.1016/s0003-9993(96)90130-6. PMID: 8931518.

30. Akobeng AK. Understanding diagnostic tests 1: sensitivity, specificity and predictive values. Acta Paediatr. 2007; 96:338–41. DOI: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2006.00180.x. PMID: 17407452.

31. Cicchetti DV. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess. 1994; 6:284–90. DOI: 10.1037//1040-3590.6.4.284.

32. Quinn TJ, Elliott E, Langhorne P. Cognitive and mood assessment tools for use in stroke. Stroke. 2018; 49:483–90. DOI: 10.1161/strokeaha.117.016994. PMID: 29284733.

33. Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016; 15:155–63. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012. PMID: 27330520.

34. Wilson SM, Eriksson DK, Brandt TH, Schneck SM, Lucanie JM, Burchfield AS, et al. Patterns of recovery from aphasia in the first 2 weeks after stroke. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2019; 62:723–32. DOI: 10.1044/2018_jslhr-l-18-0254. PMID: 30950735.

35. Pendlebury ST, Cuthbertson FC, Welch SJ, Mehta Z, Rothwell PM. Underestimation of cognitive impairment by Mini-Mental State Examination versus the Montreal Cognitive Assessment in patients with transient ischemic attack and stroke: a population-based study. Stroke. 2010; 41:1290–3. DOI: 10.1161/strokeaha.110.579888. PMID: 20378863.

36. Jokinen H, Melkas S, Ylikoski R, Pohjasvaara T, Kaste M, Erkinjuntti T, et al. Post-stroke cognitive impairment is common even after successful clinical recovery. Eur J Neurol. 2015; 22:1288–94. DOI: 10.1111/ene.12743. PMID: 26040251.