ReviewNeuropsychology review2013
Administration and environment considerations in computer-based sports-concussion assessment.
Review in Neuropsychology review, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reliability and Minimal Detectable Change of the Standardized Assessment of Reaction Time.Journal of athletic training · 2023Article
- Sensitivity and Specificity of the ImPACT Neurocognitive Test in Collegiate Athletes and US Military Service Academy Cadets with ADHD and/or LD: Findings from the NCAA-DoD CARE Consortium.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
- Influential Factors and Preliminary Reference Data for a Clinically Feasible, Functional Reaction Time Assessment: The Standardized Assessment of Reaction Time.Journal of athletic training · 2023Article
- Slowed driving-reaction time following concussion-symptom resolution.Journal of sport and health science · 2021Article
- Sensitivity and Specificity of Computer-Based Neurocognitive Tests in Sport-Related Concussion: Findings from the NCAA-DoD CARE Consortium.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Article
- Article
- Cognitive, emotion control, and motor performance of adolescents in the NCANDA study: Contributions from alcohol consumption, age, sex, ethnicity, and family history of addiction.Neuropsychology · 2016Article
- Prospective, Head-to-Head Study of Three Computerized Neurocognitive Assessment Tools (CNTs): Reliability and Validity for the Assessment of Sport-Related Concussion.Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS · 2016Article
- Rates and Predictors of Invalid Baseline Test Performance in High School and Collegiate Athletes for 3 Computerized Neurocognitive Tests: ANAM, Axon Sports, and ImPACT.The American journal of sports medicine · 2015Article
- Cognition Uniquely Influences Dual-Task Tandem Gait Performance Among Athletes With a Concussion History.Sports healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computer-based testing has become a vital tool for the assessment of sport-related concussion (SRC). An increasing number of papers have been published on this topic, focusing on subjects such as the purpose and validity of baseline testing, the performance of special populations on computer-based tests, the psychometric properties of different computerized neurocognitive tools, and considerations for valid and reliable administration of these tools. The current paper describes several considerations regarding computerized test design, input and output devices, and testing environment that should be described explicitly when administering computer-based cognitive testing, regardless of whether the assessment is used for clinical or research purposes. The paper also reviews the conclusions of recent literature (2007-2013) using computer-based testing for the assessment of SRC, with special attention to the methods used in these studies. We also present an appendix checklist for clinicians and researchers that may be helpful in ensuring proper attention to factors that could influence the reliability and validity of computer-based cognitive testing. We believe that explicit attention to these technological factors may lead to the development of standards for the development and implementation of computer-based tests. Such standards have the potential to enhance the accuracy and utility of computer-based tests in SRC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24306286What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.