Cognitive Communication Impairments in Children With Traumatic Brain Injury: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This scoping review synthesizes the scholarly literature on cognitive communication impairments in traumatic brain injury (TBI) sustained during childhood to identify gaps in research, and make recommendations that will further the field of cognitive communication in pediatric TBI. METHODS: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and EMBASE were searched to identify peer-reviewed studies that examined cognitive communication impairments in children who sustained a TBI between 3 months to 18 years of age. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies met inclusion criteria with 3 main categories identified in relation to cognitive communication: (1) impairments according to TBI severity, (2) impairments according to age at injury, and (3) trends in recovery according to TBI severity. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this scoping review suggest that (1) TBI severity is not the sole predictor of performance; other factors contribute to cognitive communication outcome and recovery; (2) developing skills at time of injury are most susceptible to impairment; and (3) standard, norm-referenced language assessments are not sensitive in detecting language impairments that are secondary to cognitive impairments found in TBI. Directions for future research and suggestions for clinical practice are proposed.
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 | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".