Observational studyNeuroImage2023
Comparisons of electrophysiological markers of impaired executive attention after traumatic brain injury and in healthy aging.
Observational study in NeuroImage, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Longitudinal Multimodal Neuroimaging After Traumatic Brain Injury.Human brain mapping · 2026Article
- GABABrain communications · 2026Article
- Neurophysiological Markers of Reward Processing Can Inform Preclinical Neurorehabilitation Approaches for Cognitive Impairments Following Brain Injury.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Coupling of Event-Related Potential and Pupil Dilation as a Compensatory Marker of Executive Attention in Traumatic Brain Injury.Neurotrauma reports · 2025Article
- Dysregulation of iron transport-related biomarkers in blood leukocytes is associated with poor prognosis of early trauma.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Comparisons of electrophysiological markers of impaired executive attention after traumatic brain injury and in healthy aging.NeuroImage · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Executive attention impairments are a persistent and debilitating consequence of traumatic brain injury (TBI). To make headway towards treating and predicting outcomes following heterogeneous TBI, cognitive impairment specific pathophysiology first needs to be characterized. In a prospective observational study, we measured EEG during the attention network test aimed at detecting alerting, orienting, executive attention and processing speed. The sample (N = 110) of subjects aged 18-86 included those with and without traumatic brain injury: n = 27, complicated mild TBI; n = 5, moderate TBI; n = 10, severe TBI; n = 63, non-brain-injured controls. Subjects with TBI had impairments in processing speed and executive attention. Electrophysiological markers of executive attention processing in the midline frontal regions reveal that, as a group, those with TBI and elderly non-brain-injured controls have reduced responses. We also note that those with TBI and elderly controls have responses that are similar for both low and high-demand trials. In subjects with moderate-severe TBI, reductions in frontal cortical activation and performance profiles are both similar to that of controls who are ∼4 to 7 years older. Our specific observations of frontal response reductions in subjects with TBI and in older adults is consistent with the suggested role of the anterior forebrain mesocircuit as underlying cognitive impairments. Our results provide novel correlative data linking specific pathophysiological mechanisms underlying domain-specific cognitive deficits following TBI and with normal aging. Collectively, our findings provide biomarkers that may serve to track therapeutic interventions and guide development of targeted therapeutics following brain injuries.
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.