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

Colette Sanctuary, Luisa Hewitt, Nele Demeyere, Kirsti Kankkunen, D. Vincent Oxenham, Dawn B. Simpson, Renerus J. Stolwyk, Artemis Synn, Sam S. Webb, Dianne L. Marsden

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)


Introduction: Two parallel versions (A and B) of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS) were developed in the United Kingdom (UK) as a stroke-specific screen of five key cognitive domains commonly affected post-stroke. We aimed to develop the Australian versions A and B (OCS-AU), including Australian cut-scores indicative of impairment. We hypothesised there to be no difference in performance between the UK and Australian normative data cohorts. Methods: Our multidisciplinary expert panel used the UK pre-defined process to develop the OCS-AU versions A and B. We then conducted a cross-sectional normative study. We purposively recruited community-dwelling, Australian-born, and educated adults; with no known cognitive impairment; representative of age, sex, education level, and living location; at seven sites (four metropolitan, three regional) across four Australian states. Participants completed one or both OCS-AU versions in a randomised order. Australian cohorts were compared with the corresponding UK cohorts for demographics using Pearson's chi-squared test for sex and education, and Welch two-sample t test for age. For the cut-scores indicating cognitive impairment, the fifth (95th) percentiles and group mean performance score for each scored item were compared using Welch two-sample t tests. The pre-defined criteria for retaining OCS cut-scores had no statistically significant difference in either percentile or group mean scores for each scored item. Results: Participants (n = 83) were recruited: fifty-eight completed version A [age (years) mean = 61,SD = 15; 62% female], 60 completed version B [age (years) mean = 62,SD = 13, 53% female], and 35 completed both [age (years) mean = 64,SD = 11, 54% female]. Education was different between the cohorts for version B (12 years, p = 0.002). Cut-scores for all 16 scored items for the OCS-AU version B and 15/16 for version A met our pre-defined criteria for retaining the OCS cut scores. Conclusions: The OCS-AU provides clinicians with an Australian-specific, first-line cognitive screening tool for people after stroke. Early screening can guide treatment and management.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)73-85
Number of pages13
JournalAustralian Occupational Therapy Journal
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2022


  • Australia
  • cognition
  • diagnosis
  • screening
  • Stroke

Cite this