INCOG 2.0 Guidelines for Cognitive Rehabilitation Following Traumatic Brain Injury: Methods, Overview, and Principles
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) results in complex cognitive sequelae. Despite hundreds of clinical trials in cognitive rehabilitation, the translation of these findings into clinical practice remains a challenge. Clinical practice guidelines are one solution. The objective of this initiative was to reconvene the international group of cognitive researchers and clinicians (known as INCOG) to develop INCOG 2.0: Guidelines for Cognitive Rehabilitation Following TBI. METHODS: The guidelines adaptation and development cycle was used to update the recommendations and derive new ones. The team met virtually and reviewed the literature published since the original INCOG (2014) to update the recommendations and decision algorithms. The team then prioritized the recommendations for implementation and modified the audit tool accordingly to allow for the evaluation of adherence to best practices. RESULTS: In total, the INCOG update contains 80 recommendations (25 level A, 15 level B, and 40 level C) of which 27 are new. Recommendations developed for posttraumatic amnesia, attention, memory, executive function and cognitive-communication are outlined in other articles, whereas this article focuses on the overarching principles of care for which there are 38 recommendations pertaining to: assessment (10 recommendations), principles of cognitive rehabilitation (6 recommendations), medications to enhance cognition (10 recommendations), teleassessment (5 recommendations), and telerehabilitation intervention (7 recommendations). One recommendation was supported by level A evidence, 7 by level B evidence, and all remaining recommendations were level C evidence. New to INCOG are recommendations for telehealth-delivered cognitive assessment and rehabilitation. Evidence-based clinical algorithms and audit tools for evaluating the state of current practice are also provided. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation guided by these recommendations should be offered to individuals with TBI. Despite the advancements in TBI rehabilitation research, further high-quality studies are needed to better understand the role of cognitive rehabilitation in improving patient outcomes after TBI.
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.
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 | 0.013 | 0.074 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it