ReviewConcussion (London, England)2017
A review of the validity of computerized neurocognitive assessment tools in mild traumatic brain injury assessment.
Review in Concussion (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Proposing a "Brain Health Checkup (BHC)" as a Global Potential "Standard of Care" to Overcome Reward Dysregulation in Primary Care Medicine: Coupling Genetic Risk Testing and Induction of "Dopamine Homeostasis".International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- A randomized clinical trial of plasticity-based cognitive training in mild traumatic brain injury.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2021Trial
- Implementing Technology in Neuropsychological Assessments: A Scoping Review.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
- Cognitive Impairment in Rheumatoid Arthritis: The Role of Pain, Inflammation, and Multimorbidity in Neuropsychological Outcomes.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Computerized Evaluation of Attention, Learning-Memory, and Executive Function in People with Disability Caused by Injury: A Pilot Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Is the Korean Mini-Mental State Examination (K-MMSE) Useful in Evaluating the Cognitive Function of Brain Injury Patients?: Through Correlation Analysis With Computerized Neurocognitive Test (CNT).Brain & NeuroRehabilitation · 2024Article
- Identifying delay in glymphatic clearance of labeled protons post-acute head trauma utilizing 3D ASL MRI (arterial spin labeling): a pilot study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Computerized Cognitive Test Batteries for Children and Adolescents-A Scoping Review of Tools For Lab- and Web-Based Settings From 2000 to 2021.Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists · 2023Article
- Computerised cognitive assessment in patients with traumatic brain injury: an observational study of feasibility and sensitivity relative to established clinical scales.EClinicalMedicine · 2023Article
- Psycho-affective health, cognition, and neurophysiological functioning following sports-related concussion in symptomatic and asymptomatic athletes, and control athletes.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Harrogate consensus agreement: Cycling-specific sport-related concussion.Sports medicine and health science · 2021Article
- Neurocognitive Assessment Tools for Military Personnel With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Scoping Literature Review.JMIR mental health · 2021Article
- Validation of a Machine Learning Brain Electrical Activity-Based Index to Aid in Diagnosing Concussion Among Athletes.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Article
- Overpressure Exposure From .50-Caliber Rifle Training Is Associated With Increased Amyloid Beta Peptides in Serum.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Article
- Continued Play Following Sport-Related Concussion in United States Youth Soccer.International journal of exercise science · 2020Article
- The auditory comprehension changes over time after sport-related concussion can indicate multisensory processing dysfunctions.Brain and behavior · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computerized neurocognitive assessment tools (NCATs) offer potential advantages over traditional neuropsychological tests in postconcussion assessments. However, their psychometric properties and clinical utility are still questionable. The body of research regarding the validity and clinical utility of NCATs suggests some support for aspects of validity (e.g., convergent validity) and some ability to distinguish between concussed individuals and controls, though there are still questions regarding the validity of these tests and their clinical utility, especially outside of the acute injury timeframe. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive summary of the existing validity literature for four commonly used and studied NCATs (automated neuropsychological assessment metrics, CNS vital signs, cogstate and immediate post-concussion and cognitive testing) and lay the groundwork for future investigations.
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.