ArticleBMJ open sport & exercise medicine2016
SCAT2 and SCAT3 scores at baseline and after sports-related mild brain injury/concussion: qualitative synthesis with weighted means.
Article in BMJ open sport & exercise medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Clinical Utility of the Child SCAT5 for Acute Concussion Assessment.Sports medicine - open · 2022Article
- Effect of Sleep-Related Symptoms on Recovery From a Sport-Related Concussion.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2022Article
- Reporting of Concussion-Like Symptoms After Cycling Crashes: A Survey of Competitive and Recreational Cyclists.Journal of athletic training · 2020Article
- The Sport Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT2) for evaluating civilian mild traumatic brain injury. A pilot normative study.PloS one · 2019Article
- Perceptual-cognitive three-dimensional multiple-object tracking task can help the monitoring of sport-related concussion.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIdentify all Sport Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT2/3) studies, compare baseline and postconcussion results.
designSystematic review (qualitative synthesis, weighted means). DATA SOURCES: 18 databases, 9 grey literature resources searched for SCAT2/3 data; 9150 articles identified, titles/abstracts assessed/data-entry independently by two reviewers. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Any studies reporting partial/complete SCAT2/3 data.
results21 studies with data (partial/complete data 16 SCAT2 (4087 athletes); 5 SCAT3 (891). Newcastle-Ottawa risk-of-bias scale: studies with maximum possible score of 4, 85% scored 3 or 4; studies with maximum possible score of 6, 75% scored 5 or 6. SCAT2 high schoolers: weighted mean score for symptoms 18.46 (22=no symptoms), Balance Error Scoring System (BESS) 26.14, Standardised Assessment of Concussion (SAC) 26.00 and SCAT2 total 88.63. Collegiate/adults weighted means: symptoms 20.09, BESS 25.54, SAC 27.51 and total SCAT2 91.20. Between-study and within-study variability similar to those of the high schoolers. Limited variability between genders. Only 2 studies report baseline and postconcussion scores and 9 partial scores, but data are too limited to provide weighted average scores.
conclusionsGroup mean baseline SCAT scores for high school and collegiate athletes are similar, with minimal gender differences; baseline symptoms show more variability than other components. There are minimal data for elementary students and professionals, no data for adult non-collegiate athletes. Two studies provide preconcussion and postconcussion scores. No data on minimal significant clinical differences to guide players/coaches in withdrawing from a game in progress and deciding when recovery is complete and play can be resumed. The SCAT needs supplementing with clinical and neuropsychological return-to-play assessments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.