Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41446547›Full record

ReviewInnovations in clinical neuroscience

Office-based Neurophysiological Assessments for Diagnosis and Prognosis of Concussion.

Robert G Bashuk, Stephen L Scranton, Robert S Allen, Marco Cecchi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Innovations in clinical neuroscience. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Robert G BashukDrs. Bashuk and Allen are with the Concussion Center in Atlanta, Georgia.
Stephen L ScrantonDr. Scranton is with Brain Fitness Centers of Florida in Clearwater, Florida.
Robert S AllenDrs. Bashuk and Allen are with the Concussion Center in Atlanta, Georgia.
Marco CecchiDr. Cecchi is with Cognision in Louisville, Kentucky.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients with concussion often receive insufficient and/or ineffective diagnostic workups. A limiting factor for prompt and accurate diagnosis is the scarcity of practical and effective concussion diagnostics that can be used by private-practice physicians. This gap in the diagnostic process can delay the implementation of crucial interventions. The absence of an affirmative concussion diagnosis leaves patients with few options when follow-up treatment would otherwise be indicated, potentially leading to worsening symptoms, prolonged recovery, and a higher likelihood of developing long-term complications. Neurophysiological assessments such as electroencephalography (EEG) and event-related potentials (ERPs) offer an opportunity for an objective evaluation of brain deficits that can occur after a concussion. By detecting abnormalities in brain patterns that are often associated with concussive injuries, these tests can help provide timely diagnosis and treatment of the disorder, thus reducing the likelihood of chronification of post-concussive symptoms. We reviewed a battery of neurophysiological assessments that have been scientifically validated to detect the pathophysiological effects of concussion and can be performed in office settings by nonspecialist technicians. These assessments are designed to help with diagnosis and prognosis of concussion, while also being accessible and practical to administer for private-practice physicians who can incorporate them into routine evaluations of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). The implementation of neurophysiological tools in primary care and outpatient settings has the potential to bridge the gap between symptom presentation and definitive diagnosis, thus mitigating the risk for long-term adverse outcomes.

Indexed as

ConcussiondiagnosisEEGevent-related potentialsoffice settingsprognosisTBI

Identifiers

PMID41446547
PMCPMC12724993

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.