ReviewBrain communications2026
Longitudinal changes in cognitive ability following traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Brain communications, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The longitudinal impact of traumatic brain injury on cognitive functioning has been widely studied, though findings remain inconsistent. This may be due to variations in injury severity between participants, and the timing of assessments between studies. This meta-analysis aims to address these limitations by providing an overview of longitudinal cognitive changes in moderate-severe traumatic brain injury cohorts. This meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024562211). PubMed, EMBASE via Ovid and APAPsychInfo via EBSCOHost were last searched in August 2025 and were screened based on pre-established eligibility criteria, regardless of publication date, including longitudinal cognitive assessment in moderate-severe traumatic brain injury cohorts. Studies without follow-up assessments in at least 3 months after the baseline assessment were excluded. Separate random effects meta-analyses were conducted for each assessed cognitive domain (memory, processing speed, verbal ability, visuospatial ability, executive functioning), due to the expected variability in the change trajectories between them. Where appropriate, meta-regression analyses using a random effects maximum likelihood estimator examined the impact of assessment timing on cognitive change. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. Of 9481 original articles, 21 met the eligibility criteria and included a total of 972 participants. Significant improvements were found in memory, processing speed, verbal and visuospatial ability, with effect sizes ranging from 0.27 to 0.38. However, longitudinal assessment of executive functioning did not indicate significant changes (
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.