Pediatric concussion working memory outcomes: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Characterize the working memory (WM) profile of children and youth who have experienced concussion by systematically synthesizing existing literature on the neuropsychological outcomes of these injuries.Methods: Implemented a peer-reviewed search strategy combining key concepts of concussion/mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), WM, and pediatrics across MedLine, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. Included studies written in English with extractable results on a WM outcome measure in individuals aged 21 and under who experienced concussion. Applied narrative synthesis to identify trends in the literature. Assessed risk of bias and quality using the NHLBI’s Quality Assessment of Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies.Results: 40 articles met inclusion criteria. 34/40 studies compared WM performance in children or youth with concussion to healthy controls, pre-injury performance, or normative values, of which 15 reported significantly lower WM performance in the concussion sample. Visual/spatial WM was more consistently impacted than verbal WM. Cognitive demanding dual-task conditions were also reliably impacted.Conclusion: Literature indicated that WM is vulnerable to negative outcomes following pediatric concussion, yet the nature of outcomes is variable. Clinicians and researchers should implement comprehensive and theoretically motivated WM assessments to better understand the WM components impacted by injury.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".