Changes in working memory performance in youth following concussion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the working memory (WM) performance pre- and post-concussion, and investigate the relationships between performance changes and characteristics such as self-reported symptom scores, number of days post-injury and age at injury in 10-14-year-old youth. METHODS: Twenty-one youth (17 males) aged 10-14 years recruited from the community completed verbal and non-verbal WM tasks pre- and post-concussion. Performance was measured using accuracy and performance errors (false alarms and misses). Pre- and post-tests were compared using a Wilcoxon signed rank test, and effect size was determined using matched-pairs rank biserial correlation. RESULTS: Comparisons showed lower verbal WM accuracy at post-test, greater verbal and non-verbal WM false alarm errors at post-test, and greater verbal WM miss errors at post-test (all r ≥ 0.30). Correlations between performance and characteristics revealed associations between younger youth and lower non-verbal WM accuracy and more false alarms at post-test, as well as an association among non-verbal WM miss errors, higher PCS scores and fewer days since injury at post-test. CONCLUSIONS: The current study found lower WM performance in youth following concussion. Furthermore, the findings suggest that false alarm errors may be a useful screening measure acutely post-concussion when assessing WM performance in youth.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".