ArticleInternational journal of sports physical therapy2020
A COMPARISON OF THE PAPER AND COMPUTERIZED TABLET VERSION OF THE KING-DEVICK TEST IN COLLEGIATE ATHLETES AND THE INFLUENCE OF AGE ON PERFORMANCE.
Article in International journal of sports physical therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundSport-related concussion is a public concern with between 1.6 and 3.8 million sport- and recreation-related injuries occurring annually. An estimated 65% to 90% of concussed athletes show oculomotor disruption such as difficulty with saccades, accommodation, smooth pursuit, and fixation. A rapid number-naming saccade test, the King-Devick (K-D) test, has shown promising results as part of a multifaceted concussion assessment tool. PURPOSE: The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the two versions of the K-D in collegiate aged (18-24) athletes to determine the agreement between versions. A secondary purpose was to investigate the association of K-D scores with sport, sex, use of glasses or contacts, and age of the athlete. STUDY
designDescriptive laboratory study.
methodsDivision 1 NCAA collegiate athletes across ten sports were recruited to participate in baseline concussion assessments at the beginning of their respective athletic season. Correlations and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to investigate the association of K-D scores with sex and age.
resultsOne-hundred and nine athletes (69 males, 40 females; mean age = 20.40 ± 1.38 years) were baseline tested. There was excellent agreement (ICC=0.93, 95% CI: 0.90, 0.95) between the paper and computer version. Preseason K-D scores were statistically different (r
conclusionThis study supports the use of either version of the K-D test as a potential part of a multifaceted concussion assessment. The age of the athlete influences scores and therefore a K-D baseline should be repeated annually for collegiate athletes. Clinicians should not substitute K-D versions (computer vs. paper) in comparing baseline to a post-concussion K-D score as the scores are quite different. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3.
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.