MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte

Communication and Cognitive-Communication Assessment & Management in Mild Traumatic Brain injury/Concussion : a Scoping Review

2017· other· en· W6945961022 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library) · 2017
Typeother
Langueen
Domaine
Thématique
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPopulationContext (archaeology)Identification (biology)Filter (signal processing)Risk assessmentData collection

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background and rationaleConcussion/mild Traumatic Brain Injury (mTBI) is a commonly occurring injury and data from the Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation indicate that, in the province of Ontario, Canada, almost 150,000 people are diagnosed every year with a concussion, by a family or emergency department doctor or pediatrician. While the majority of individuals recover without complications, approximately twenty percent will go on to experience persistent and potentially debilitating symptoms that negatively impact returning to functional activities, including school, work, and recreation. Impairments in aspects of communication, that may include difficulties following complex conversations, finding words, formulating sentences, reading, writing, and social communication have been reported clinically among those with persistent symptoms. These difficulties are not routinely evaluated and the emerging evidence regarding assessment and treatment of communication and cognitive-communication issues following mTBI/concussion has not been well established. Objectives: tThe purpose of this review was to synthesize and chart the literature regarding assessment and management of communication and cognitive-communication issues following mTBI/concussion. Gaps in the literature and future research directions were also identified. Methods:This scoping review was conducted according to the framework proposed by Arksey and Ou2019Malley (2005). Searches were conducted by an Information Specialist in Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, PubMed, CINAHL, and SpeechBite databases for studies published in English between 1995 and August 2016. An additional search was conducted in April 2018 to capture current literature. The search was focused on literature examining communication and cognitive-communication impairments in adults and children who have sustained an mTBI or concussion. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to select the relevant papers. Two levels of screening were conducted (title and abstract, full text reading), by two independent reviewers and conflicts resolved by consensus.Results: A total of 1081 articles were identified following the database searches. Of these, 39 studies met inclusion criteria. These were charted and categorized into 11 main categories based on the communication and cognitive-communication impairments or management programs identified: Cognitive-Communication, Naming/Reaction Time, Discourse/Pragmatics, Language, Dysfluency, Assessment, Protocols, Knowledge/Survey, Epidemiology, and Return To Work. Most articles crossed a number of categories and these categories were expanded and charted. Conclusions: Results of this scoping review suggest that adults and children who have sustained an mTBI/concussion, regardless of mechanism of injury, may present with ongoing communication and/or cognitive-communication impairments. These persisting impairments can benefit from assessment and management. Limitations and gaps in the literature were identified regarding studies specific to mTBI or concussion, as the majority of studies combined participants of all severity levels or there were different definitions of concussion used across studies to identify participants. An additional gap in the literature was identified related to the impact of communication and cognitive-communication impairments on return-to-work. These gaps may suggest directions for future research.

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)0,006
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Bibliométrie, Communication savante, Science ouverte, Intégrité de la recherche, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCommunication savante, Science ouverte, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,362
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0060,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,000
Bibliométrie0,0180,011
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,002
Communication savante0,0060,016
Science ouverte0,0110,020
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0080,003

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 Opus0,187
Tête enseignante GPT0,470
Écart entre enseignants0,283 · 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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

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
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library)Travaux en français237 207