Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41200440›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025

Revealing gender differences in concussion reporting: a detailed analysis of SCAT assessment self-report symptom ratings.

Rachel Edelstein, Karen M Schmidt, John Darrell Van Horn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Rachel EdelsteinDepartment of Psychology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, United States.
Karen M SchmidtDepartment of Psychology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, United States.
John Darrell Van HornDepartment of Psychology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Current concussion assessments used by the NCAA are generally applied to both male and female athletes to evaluate the effects of sports-related head impacts. However, increasing evidence indicates that female athletes show different physiological and psychosocial responses to concussions compared to their male counterparts, raising concerns about the suitability of gender blind concussion assessments. Methods: This study analyzes data from Results: Based on EGA and PCA, the SCAT3 showed a four-factor substructure, with EFA accounting for 62.44% of the variance. LDA comparing males and females revealed a significant difference in their multivariate score distributions ( Discussion: Differences in symptom presentation post-concussion may suggest that: (1) males tend to be more conservative in reporting and only endorse symptoms when they are more intense, leading to higher scores on fewer symptoms, whereas (2) females may more readily emphasize emotional and physical symptoms. The findings imply that considering gender differences in concussion symptom reporting is important when making clinical recommendations.

Indexed as

concussiongender differencesNCAA athletespsychometricsSCAT3symptom reporting

Identifiers

PMID41200440
PMCPMC12586076

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.