Adult Cognitive Outcomes Following Childhood Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to (1) summarize the existing literature regarding cognitive outcomes in adults with a history of pediatric mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) and (2) identify gaps in the literature to provide directions for future research. PARTICIPANTS: Participants sustained mTBI in childhood (0-17 years of age) and underwent cognitive assessment in adulthood (older than 18 years) at least 1 year postinjury. DESIGN: MEDLINE Ovid and PsycINFO Ovid databases were searched to identify original research studies that examined adult cognitive outcomes after childhood mTBI. MAIN MEASURES: Cognitive outcome measures assessed memory, attention, visuospatial abilities, processing speed, comprehension, reasoning, intellectual functioning, and executive functioning. Outcome measures ranged from self-reported cognitive symptoms to objective testing. RESULTS: A total of 4216 articles were screened, leading to the inclusion of 6 published studies for review (3 prospective cohort and 3 retrospective cohort), with 131 537 participants (mTBI = 6724; controls = 123 823). Review of the included articles suggests that adults with a history of childhood mTBI perform within the average range expected for adult cognitive functioning, although they may perform more poorly than non-head-injured comparison groups on a variety of cognitive measures. Injury-related factors, such as requiring electroencephalography within 24 hours of injury and posttraumatic amnesia lasting longer than 30 minutes, may be associated with variability in adult cognitive outcomes. CONCLUSION: The weight of the available evidence suggests that childhood mTBI does not have a significant impact on adult cognitive functioning. However, further research is needed to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the long-term cognitive outcomes of childhood mTBI and to identify predictors of those outcomes in adulthood.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".