INCOG 2.0 Guidelines for Cognitive Rehabilitation Following Traumatic Brain Injury, Part V: Memory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Memory impairments affecting encoding, acquisition, and retrieval of information after moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) have debilitating and enduring functional consequences. The interventional research reviewed primarily focused on mild to severe memory impairments in episodic and prospective memory. As memory is a common focus of cognitive rehabilitation, clinicians should understand and use the latest evidence. Therefore, the INCOG ("International Cognitive") 2014 clinical practice guidelines were updated. METHODS: An expert panel of clinicians/researchers reviewed evidence published since 2014 and developed updated recommendations for intervention for memory impairments post-TBI, a decision-making algorithm, and an audit tool for review of clinical practice. RESULTS: The interventional research approaches for episodic and prospective memory from 2014 are synthesized into 8 recommendations (6 updated and 2 new). Six recommendations are based on level A evidence and 2 on level B. In summary, they include the efficacy of choosing individual or multiple internal compensatory strategies, which can be delivered in a structured or individualized program. Of the external compensatory strategies, which should be the primary strategy for severe memory impairment, electronic reminder systems such as smartphone technology are preferred, with technological advances increasing their viability over traditional systems. Furthermore, microprompting personal digital assistant technology is recommended to cue completion of complex tasks. Memory strategies should be taught using instruction that considers the individual's functional and contextual needs while constraining errors. Memory rehabilitation programs can be delivered in an individualized or mixed format using group instruction. Computer cognitive training should be conducted with therapist guidance. Limited evidence exists to suggest that acetylcholinesterase inhibitors improve memory, so trials should include measures to assess impact. The use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is not recommended for memory rehabilitation. CONCLUSION: These recommendations for memory rehabilitation post-TBI reflect the current evidence and highlight the limitations of group instruction with heterogeneous populations of TBI. Further research is needed on the role of medications and tDCS to enhance memory.
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 | 0.019 | 0.070 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.008 |
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".