ArticleAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2024
Memory and Traumatic Brain Injury: Assessment and Management Practices of Speech-Language Pathologists.
Article in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2024. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Semantic Memory, Traumatic Brain Injury, and the Iceberg Effect: What Deficits May Lie Below the Surface?American journal of speech-language pathology · 2025Review
- Naming Ability in the Chronic Phase of Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMemory impairments are among the most commonly reported deficits and among the most frequent rehabilitation targets for individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Memory and learning are also critical for rehabilitation success and broader long-term outcomes. Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) play a central role in memory management for individuals with TBI across the continuum of care. Yet, little is known about the current practice patterns of SLPs for post-TBI memory disorders. This study aims to examine the clinical management of memory disorders in adults with TBI by SLPs and identify opportunities to improve post-TBI memory outcomes.
methodSLPs from across the continuum of care were recruited to complete an online survey. The survey assessed key practice areas specific to memory and memory disorders post-TBI, including education and training, knowledge and confidence, and assessment and treatment patterns.
resultsSurveys from 155 SLPs were analyzed. Results revealed that TBI-specific training remains low in the field. Respondents varied in their practice patterns in assessing and treating memory disorders. Most SLPs do not appear to have access to appropriate standardized assessments to measure unique forms of memory. Respondents also reported a range of barriers and opportunities to advance memory outcomes following TBI and provided suggestions of areas in which they would like to see more basic and clinical research.
conclusionsThese findings establish a baseline of the current practices for clinical management of memory impairment in adults with TBI by SLPs. Improved opportunities for clinician training, the development of a single tool to assess multiple forms of memory, better access to existing memory assessments, and implementation of evidence-based interventions promise to lead to improved memory outcomes for individuals with TBI.
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.