ArticlePloS one2021
The journey is just as important as the destination-Digital neuropsychological assessment provides performance stability measures in patients with acquired brain injury.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital Innovations for Clinical Assessment in Acquired Brain Injury: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Moving toward the digitalization of neuropsychological tests: An exploratory study on usability and operator perception.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCognitive performances on neuropsychological paper-and-pencil tests are generally evaluated quantitatively by examining a final score (e.g., total duration). Digital tests allow for a quantitative evaluation of "how" a patient attained a final score, which opens the possibility to assess more subtle cognitive impairment even when final scores are evaluated as normal. We assessed performance stability (i.e., the number of fluctuations in test performance) to investigate (1) differences in performance stability between patients with acquired brain injury (ABI) and healthy controls; (2) the added value of performance stability measures in patients with ABI; and (3) the relation between performance stability and cognitive complaints in daily life in patients with ABI.
methodsWe administered three digital neuropsychological tests (Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, Trail Making Test, Stroop Colour and Word Test) and the Cognitive Complaints-Participation (CoCo-P) inventory in patients with ABI (n = 161) and healthy controls (n = 91).
resultsPatients with ABI fluctuated more in their performance on all tests, when compared to healthy controls. Furthermore, 4-15% of patients who performed inside normal range on the conventional final scores were outside normal range on the performance stability measures. The performance stability measures, nor the conventional final scores, were associated with cognitive complaints in daily life.
conclusionsStability in test performance of patients was clearly dissociable from healthy controls, and may assess additional cognitive weaknesses which might not be observed or objectified with paper-and-pencil tests. More research is needed for developing measures better associated with cognitive complaints.
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.