ArticleBMC psychology2017
A case matched study examining the reliability of using ImPACT to assess effects of multiple concussions.
Article in BMC psychology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Memory outcomes and interventions after sports-related traumatic brain injuries in pediatric and young adult athletes: a scoping review.Journal of pediatric psychology · 2025Article
- Sex Differences in Traumatic Brain Injury: What We Know and What We Should Know.Journal of neurotrauma · 2019Article
- Research on the changes in balance motion behavior and learning, as well as memory abilities of rats with multiple cerebral concussion-induced chronic traumatic encephalopathy and the underlying mechanism.Experimental and therapeutic 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundApproximately 3.8 million sport and recreational concussions occur per year, creating a need for accurate diagnosis and management of concussions. Researchers and clinicians are exploring the potential dose-response cumulative effects of concussive injuries using computerized neuropsychological exams, however, results have been mixed and/or contradictory. This study starts with a large adolescent population and applies strict inclusion criteria to examine how previous mild traumatic brain injuries affect symptom reports and neurocognitive performance on the Immediate Post-concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) computerized tool.
methodsAfter applying exclusion criteria and case matching, 204 male and 99 female participants remained. These participants were grouped according to sex and the number of previous self-reported concussions and examined for overall differences on symptoms reported and scores obtained on the ImPACT neurocognitive battery composites. In an effort to further reduce confounding factors due to the varying group sizes, participants were then case matched on age, sex, and body mass index and analyzed for differences on symptoms reported and scores obtained on the ImPACT neurocognitive battery composites.
resultsCase matched analysis demonstrated males with concussions experience significantly higher rates of dizziness (p = .027, η
conclusionsThe results suggest that male adolescent athletes reporting multiple concussions have lingering concussive symptoms well after the last concussive event; however, these symptoms were found to be conflicting and better explained by complainer versus complacent attitudes in the population examined. Our results conflict with a significant portion of the current literature that uses relatively lenient inclusion and exclusion criteria, providing evidence of the importance of strict inclusion and exclusion criteria and examination of confounding factors when assessing the effects of concussions.
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.