Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37502093›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in human neuroscience2023

Clinical application of recommendations for neurobehavioral assessment in disorders of consciousness: an interdisciplinary approach.

Brooke Murtaugh, Amy Shapiro Rosenbaum

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Brooke Murtaugh *Department of Rehabilitation Programs, Madonna Rehabilitation Hospitals, Lincoln, NE, United States.
Amy Shapiro Rosenbaum *Department of Brain Injury Rehabilitation, Park Terrace Care Center, Queens, NY, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate diagnosis, prognosis, and subsequent rehabilitation care planning for persons with Disorders of Consciousness (DoC) has historically posed a challenge for neurological care professionals. Evidence suggests rates of misdiagnosis may be as high as 40% when informal beside evaluations are used to determine level of consciousness. The presence of myriad medical, neurological, functional (motor, sensory, cognitive) and environmental confounds germane to these conditions complicates behavioral assessment. Achieving diagnostic certainty is elusive but critical to inform care planning, clinical decision making, and prognostication. Standardized neurobehavioral rating scales has been shown to improve accuracy in distinguishing between coma, unresponsive wakefulness syndrome/vegetative state and minimally consciousness state as compared to informal assessment methods. Thus, these scales are currently recommended for use as the informal "gold standard" for diagnostic assessment in DoC. The following paper will present an evidence-based approach to neurobehavioral assessment for use in clinical practice. Strategies for optimizing assessment and aiding in identification and management of confounds that can limit diagnostic accuracy will be provided. Finally, clinical application of an interdisciplinary approach to identifying and managing confounds will be discussed and how assessment results can be used to identify trends in performance and guide prognostic counseling with families.

Indexed as

assessment practicesbrain injuryconsciousness disorders (MeSH)diagnosisprognosis

Identifiers

PMID37502093
PMCPMC10368884

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.