MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4411793626 · doi:10.1542/gr.54-1-10

Sex Matters: Timing of Concussion Recovery in Children

2025· article· en· W4411793626 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueAAP Grand Rounds · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineConcussionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedical emergencyInjury preventionPoison control

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Source: Beauchamp MH, Tang K, Ledoux A-A, et al for the Pediatric Emergency Research Canada A-CAP Study Team. Optimal recovery following pediatric concussion. JAMA Netw Open. 2025;8(3):e251092; doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.1092.Investigators from multiple institutions in Canada conducted a study to evaluate the recovery trajectory toward optimal functioning in children after concussion. Study participants were patients 8–16 years old evaluated for concussion at 1 of 5 pediatric emergency departments in Canada between September 2016 and July 2019. Standardized criteria were used for a diagnosis of concussion. A control group of children with orthopedic injury (OI) without head trauma also were enrolled as a control group. Participants in both the concussion and OI groups had follow-up study visits 10 days, 3 months, and 6 months after their injury. At each visit, multiple questionnaires were administered to assess functioning across 4 domains: motor-physical, cognitive, socio-emotional, and resilience-support. Specific measures from each domain were identified to assess optimal functioning. Ultimately, 11 measures were used to define optimal functioning. At each visit, the number of measures for which the score was above a specified threshold was determined for each participant. With this schema, each participant was assigned an optimal functioning score of 0–11 at each study visit. Regression analyses were used to assess the association of 3 main variables: time, group (OI or concussion), and sex, with optimal functioning.A total of 633 children with concussion and 334 with OI were enrolled. The median age of patients in the concussion and OI groups was 12.0 and 12.5 years, respectively. The proportion of participants contributing evaluable data across time points ranged from 71.1% to 85.7%. At the 10-day follow-up, the median optimal functioning score was 4.0 for children with concussion and 6.0 for those in the OI groups. Scores at 3 and 6 months for participants in the 2 groups were 6.0 and 7.0, respectively, for those with concussion, and 7.0 and 7.0, respectively, for patients in the OI group. In the multivariate model, time (P <0.001), group (P <0.001), and sex (P <0.001) all were significant predictors of optimal functioning scores. At the 10-day follow-up, optimal functioning scores were significantly lower in those with concussion compared to patients with OI, in both females (odds ratio [OR], 0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16, 0.36) and males (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.26, 0.53). At 3 months, females with concussion had lower scores that those with OI (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.35, 0.93), but there was no significant difference between groups in males. By 6 months post-injury, there were no significant differences in optimal functioning scores between the concussion and OI groups in either females or males. Among those with concussion, optimal functioning scores were significantly lower for females than males at the 3-month and 6-month visit.The authors conclude the recovery of optimal functioning after concussion took 3 months or longer, especially in females.Dr Bechtel has disclosed no financial relationship relevant to this commentary. This commentary does not contain a discussion of an unapproved/investigative use of a commercial product/device.Concussion causes considerable morbidity in childhood;1 thus, understanding recovery trajectories for children and adolescents with concussion is important.The current researchers investigated recovery trajectories following concussion or OI in children aged 8 to 16 years. The study authors found that children with concussions had lower optimal functioning scores than those with OI, especially early in recovery. Optimal functioning improved over time, with most children recovering from concussion within 3 to 6 months. Females with concussion showed slower recovery compared to males, with significant differences persisting up to 3 months and 6 months post injury. Time was the strongest factor associated with recovery, followed by injury type and sex. Thus, the clinical implication is that recovery from concussion may take longer than the commonly cited 1-month timeframe for symptom resolution,2 especially for girls. Anticipatory guidance and reassurance to families ought to account for the possibility of prolonged recovery.However, the current study had several minor limitations. First, using patient self-reported measures may introduce bias, as these were not objectively measured. Second, the sample was recruited from urban hospitals and may not represent the broader population that may present in primary care or urgent care settings. Finally, the findings are applicable only to children and adolescents 8–16 years old; recovery trajectories for younger children and older adolescents may be different from than that of the study population.Pediatric concussion recovery is heterogeneous, with most children achieving optimal functioning within 3 to 6 months. Recovery trajectories vary by time, sex, and injury type, underscoring the need for comprehensive assessments and individualized care. (See AAP Grand Rounds. 2024;51[6]:64.)3Although the current authors made a laudable effort to quantify 'optimal functioning,' we would add a further word of caution to interpretation of the study findings. How well did females, as compared to males, comply with recent recommendations for concussion management, which stressed early return to school and physical activity?3

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,133
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,266

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,032
Tête enseignante GPT0,334
Écart entre enseignants0,302 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAAP Grand RoundsMême sujetTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchTravaux en français237 207