ArticleBMJ open2025
Effectiveness of concussion treatments in older adults: a systematic review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionConcussions can have significant implications on the health and quality of life of older adults. As most concussion research previously focused on children, athletes and military populations, there is a need to better understand the concussion-specific treatments for adults aged 65 and older. The aim of our systematic review is to review the existing literature on the effectiveness of concussion treatments on outcomes in adults aged 65 and older. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review will be conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and the Cochrane's Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. A comprehensive search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AgeLine, APA PsycNet and Cochrane CENTRAL) will be performed and reference lists of included articles will be searched. We will conduct a two-step screening process and data extraction. The data analysis will integrate a narrative approach with vote-counting. The risk of bias in the included studies will be assessed, and the quality of evidence for each outcome will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The results of this systematic review will contribute to the current knowledge on concussion treatments and outcomes in older adults. This work is essential for identifying effective interventions and guiding future guidelines for this under-represented population. No ethical approval is needed for the review, and we plan to present the results at an international research conference and in a peer-reviewed journal. This protocol is registered in PROSPERO (CRD # pending).
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.