Alignment between goals and subjective memory concerns in measuring outcomes of memory rehabilitation post-stroke.

Authors

Nicolette Kamberis, David Lawson, Renerus J Stolwyk, Roshan das Nair, Dominique A Cadilhac, Dana Wong

Published in

Disability and rehabilitation. Pages 1-12. Sep 18, 2026. Epub Sep 18, 2026.

Abstract

Memory rehabilitation can improve memory problems post-stroke, however gains can be difficult to measure, and may change over time. We aimed to characterise whether memory problems aligned with participants' rehabilitation goals responded differently to intervention than goal-inconsistent memory problems, to identify more targeted approaches to evaluating rehabilitation outcomes.
This sub-study was nested within the Memory-SuSTAIN trial, which evaluated maintenance interventions (booster sessions, electronic reminders, usual care) following a Stroke Memory Skills Group (SMSG). Self-reported memory lapses across Forgetting and Attention domains were measured using the Everyday Memory Questionnaire Revised (EMQ-R), and Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) measured memory-related goal attainment. Goal-consistent subjective memory concerns aligned with participants' main nominated memory goal domain, whereas goal-inconsistent concerns did not. Outcomes were measured by blinded assessors at 6, 12, 18, and 24 weeks post-SMSG.
Participants were 38 stroke-survivors (median_age=53 years, median_{time-since-stroke}=13 months, 42% male). Goal-consistent, but not goal-inconsistent EMQ-R domain scores significantly reduced (improved) following initial SMSG intervention (mean change 7.68 vs 3.63 points). Both goal-consistent and goal-inconsistent subjective memory concerns improved following maintenance interventions.
Tracking goal-consistency may provide a more tailored, individualised approach to standardised measurement of cognitive rehabilitation outcomes, and optimise delivery of post-stroke memory rehabilitation.

PMID:
42758491
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 19 Sep 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.