MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Communication and Cognitive-Communication Assessment & Management in Mild Traumatic Brain injury/Concussion : a Scoping Review

2017· other· en· W6945961022 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library) · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationContext (archaeology)Identification (biology)Filter (signal processing)Risk assessmentData collection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and rationaleConcussion/mild Traumatic Brain Injury (mTBI) is a commonly occurring injury and data from the Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation indicate that, in the province of Ontario, Canada, almost 150,000 people are diagnosed every year with a concussion, by a family or emergency department doctor or pediatrician. While the majority of individuals recover without complications, approximately twenty percent will go on to experience persistent and potentially debilitating symptoms that negatively impact returning to functional activities, including school, work, and recreation. Impairments in aspects of communication, that may include difficulties following complex conversations, finding words, formulating sentences, reading, writing, and social communication have been reported clinically among those with persistent symptoms. These difficulties are not routinely evaluated and the emerging evidence regarding assessment and treatment of communication and cognitive-communication issues following mTBI/concussion has not been well established. Objectives: tThe purpose of this review was to synthesize and chart the literature regarding assessment and management of communication and cognitive-communication issues following mTBI/concussion. Gaps in the literature and future research directions were also identified. Methods:This scoping review was conducted according to the framework proposed by Arksey and Ou2019Malley (2005). Searches were conducted by an Information Specialist in Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, PubMed, CINAHL, and SpeechBite databases for studies published in English between 1995 and August 2016. An additional search was conducted in April 2018 to capture current literature. The search was focused on literature examining communication and cognitive-communication impairments in adults and children who have sustained an mTBI or concussion. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to select the relevant papers. Two levels of screening were conducted (title and abstract, full text reading), by two independent reviewers and conflicts resolved by consensus.Results: A total of 1081 articles were identified following the database searches. Of these, 39 studies met inclusion criteria. These were charted and categorized into 11 main categories based on the communication and cognitive-communication impairments or management programs identified: Cognitive-Communication, Naming/Reaction Time, Discourse/Pragmatics, Language, Dysfluency, Assessment, Protocols, Knowledge/Survey, Epidemiology, and Return To Work. Most articles crossed a number of categories and these categories were expanded and charted. Conclusions: Results of this scoping review suggest that adults and children who have sustained an mTBI/concussion, regardless of mechanism of injury, may present with ongoing communication and/or cognitive-communication impairments. These persisting impairments can benefit from assessment and management. Limitations and gaps in the literature were identified regarding studies specific to mTBI or concussion, as the majority of studies combined participants of all severity levels or there were different definitions of concussion used across studies to identify participants. An additional gap in the literature was identified related to the impact of communication and cognitive-communication impairments on return-to-work. These gaps may suggest directions for future research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.362
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0180.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.016
Open science0.0110.020
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.187
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library)French-language works237,207