ArticleJournal of functional morphology and kinesiology2022
Assessment of Somatosensory and Motor Processing Time in Retired Athletes with a History of Repeated Head Trauma.
Article in Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Cross-Cultural Adaptation, Validation and Psychometric Properties of the Mental Fatigue Scale in Turkish Athletes.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Long-Term Cumulative Effects of Repeated Concussions in Cyclists: A Neurophysiological and Sensorimotor Study.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Article
- Special Issue "Working Group in Sports Medicine".Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2024Article
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 at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Measurement of the adverse outcomes of repeated head trauma in athletes is often achieved using tests where the comparator is ‘accuracy’. While it is expected that ex-athletes would perform worse than controls, previous studies have shown inconsistent results. Here we have attempted to address these inconsistencies from a different perspective by quantifying not only accuracy, but also motor response times. Age-matched control subjects who have never experienced head trauma (n = 20; 41.8 ± 14.4 years) where compared to two cohorts of retired contact sport athletes with a history of head trauma/concussions; one with self-reported concerns (n = 36; 45.4 ± 12.6 years), and another with no ongoing concerns (n = 19; 43.1 ± 13.5 years). Participants performed cognitive (Cogstate) and somatosensory (Cortical Metrics) testing with accuracy and motor times recorded. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) investigated corticospinal conduction and excitability. Results showed that there was little difference between groups in accuracy scores. Conversely, motor times in all but one test revealed that ex-athletes with self-reported concerns were significantly slower compared to other groups (p ranges 0.031 to <0.001). TMS latency showed significantly increased time (p = 0.008) in the group with ongoing concerns. These findings suggest that incorporating motor times is more informative than considering accuracy scores alone.
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.