Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29897278›Full record

Trial reportJournal of athletic training2018

Acute Sport-Related Concussion Screening for Collegiate Athletes Using an Instrumented Balance Assessment.

Joshua Baracks, Douglas J Casa, Tracey Covassin, Ryan Sacko, Samantha E Scarneo, David Schnyer, Susan W Yeargin, Christopher Neville

Open access · diamondAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of athletic training, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Ability of Wearable Accelerometers-Based Measures to Assess the Stability of Working Postures.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Long-term impact of mild traumatic brain injury on postural stability and executive function.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2020
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Joshua BaracksUpstate Concussion Center and ¶Department of Physical Therapy Education, Orthopedic Surgery, and Physiology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY.
Douglas J CasaDepartment of Kinesiology, Korey Stringer Institute, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Tracey CovassinDepartment of Kinesiology, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
Ryan SackoDepartment of Physical Education and Athletic Training, University of South Carolina, Columbia.
Samantha E ScarneoDepartment of Kinesiology, Korey Stringer Institute, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
David SchnyerDepartment of Psychology, University of Texas, Austin.
Susan W YearginDepartment of Physical Education and Athletic Training, University of South Carolina, Columbia.
Christopher NevilleUpstate Concussion Center and ¶Department of Physical Therapy Education, Orthopedic Surgery, and Physiology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY.
SUNY Upstate Medical University · USUniversity of Connecticut · USUniversity of South Carolina · USMichigan State University · USThe University of Texas at Austin · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextWithout a true criterion standard assessment, the sport-related concussion (SRC) diagnosis remains subjective. Inertial balance sensors have been proposed to improve acute SRC assessment, but few researchers have studied their clinical utility.

objectiveTo determine if group differences exist when using objective measures of balance in a sample of collegiate athletes with recent SRCs and participants serving as the control group and to calculate sensitivity and specificity to determine the diagnostic utility of the inertial balance sensor for acute SRC injuries.

designCross-sectional cohort study.

settingMulticenter clinical trial. PATIENTS OR OTHER

participantsWe enrolled 48 participants with SRC (age = 20.62 ± 1.52 years, height = 179.76 ± 10.00 cm, mass = 83.92 ± 23.22 kg) and 45 control participants (age = 20.85 ± 1.42 years, height = 177.02 ± 9.59 cm, mass = 74.61 ± 14.92 kg) at 7 clinical sites in the United States. All were varsity or club collegiate athletes, and all participants with SRC were tested within 72 hours of SRC. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Balance performance was assessed using an inertial balance sensor. Two measures (root mean square sway and 95% ellipse sway area) were analyzed to represent a range of general balance measures. Balance assessments were conducted in double-legged, single-legged, and tandem stances.

resultsA main effect for group was associated with the root mean square sway measure ( F

conclusionsInertial balance sensors may be useful tools for objectively measuring balance during acute SRC evaluation. However, low sensitivity suggests that they may be best used in conjunction with other assessments to form a comprehensive screening that may improve sensitivity.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningAdolescentAdultAthletic InjuriesBrain ConcussionCohort StudiesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMalePostural BalanceResearch DesignSensitivity and SpecificitySportsBalance Error Scoring Systeminertial sensormild traumatic brain injuries

Identifiers

PMID29897278
PMCPMC6089035
OpenAlexW2807862348

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.