ArticleNeuropsychology2018
Prefrontal gray matter volume predicts metacognitive accuracy following traumatic brain injury.
Article in Neuropsychology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Neural Correlates of Impaired Self-awareness of Deficits after Acquired Brain Injury: A Systematic Review.Neuropsychology review · 2023Pooled it
- Brain volume abnormalities and clinical outcomes following paediatric traumatic brain injury.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2022Article
- Enhanced default mode connectivity predicts metacognitive accuracy in traumatic brain injury.Neuropsychology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo examine metacognitive ability (MC) following moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) using an empirical assessment approach and to determine the relationship between alterations in gray matter volume (GMV) and MC.
methodA sample of 62 individuals (TBI n = 34; healthy control [HC] n = 28) were included in the study. Neuroimaging and neuropsychological data were collected for all participants during the same visit. MC was quantified using an approach borrowed from signal detection theory (Type II area under the receiver operating characteristic curve calculation) to evaluate judgments during a modified version of the 3rd edition of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale's Matrix Reasoning subtest where half of the items were presented randomly and half were presented in the order of increasing difficulty. Retrospective confidence judgments were collected on an item-by-item basis. Brain volumetric analyses were conducted using FreeSurfer software.
resultsAnalyses of the modified Matrix Reasoning task data demonstrated that HCs significantly outperformed TBIs (ordered: d = .63; random: d = .58). There was a significant difference between groups for MC for the randomly presented stimuli (d = .54) but not the ordered stimuli. There was an association between GMV and MC in the TBI group between the right orbital region and MC (R2 = .11). In the HC group, there were associations between the left posterior (R2 = .17), left orbital (R2 = .29), and left dorsolateral (R2 = .21) regions and MC.
conclusionsThese results are consistent with those of previous research on MC in the cognitive neurosciences, but this study demonstrates that injury may moderate the regional contributions to MC. (PsycINFO Database Record
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.