Interprofessional Cognitive-Communication Rehabilitation Patterns for Children and Adolescents With Acquired Brain Injuries: A Retrospective Medical Chart Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Health care professionals' management and service provision for cognitive-communication disorders following pediatric acquired brain injury (ABI) are poorly understood. This retrospective medical chart review explored interprofessional cognitive-communication rehabilitation practices for children and adolescents with ABI. The aim was to describe current assessment and treatment patterns given practice overlap and the need for collaborative care among diverse health care professionals in pediatric rehabilitation. This will serve as a step toward developing practice guidelines for rehabilitation while reinforcing the critical role of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) in managing cognitive-communication disorders. METHOD: The retrospective review involved 30 consecutive admissions from a pediatric health care and research center in Ontario, Canada. The cohort comprised all eligible children and adolescents aged 2-17 years with ABI. Extracted variables included patient demographics, cognitive and communication assessment and treatment practices, and interprofessional collaboration. RESULTS: Patients varied widely in age, injury mechanism, and severity. Health care professionals such as physicians, nurses, and neuropsychologists were extensively involved in managing cognitive and communication challenges, but involvement of SLPs was limited. Interprofessional collaboration was infrequent, particularly with SLPs, even though they were members of the interdisciplinary team. CONCLUSIONS: Results revealed a lack of SLP involvement in inpatient rehabilitation of children with cognitive-communication disorders, underscoring the need for enhanced interdisciplinary collaboration. These findings suggest that the impact of cognitive impairment on communication might not be well recognized in pediatric inpatient rehabilitation, highlighting the need for not only interdisciplinary collaboration but also education regarding cognitive-communication disorders and advocacy for the role of SLPs. Future research should investigate barriers and facilitators to interprofessional practice to optimize collaboration and improve patient outcomes. Ongoing dialogue and development of shared definitions for cognitive-communication disorder, alongside targeted educational initiatives and advocacy, will promote a culture of collaborative practice and ensure comprehensive care for pediatric patients with cognitive-communication disorders. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.29575172.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".