Asken, Breton M; Clugston, James R; Snyder, Aliyah R; Bauer, Russell M
Baseline Neurocognitive Performance and Clearance for Athletes to Return to Contact Journal Article
In: Journal of Athletic Training, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 51–57, 2017, ISBN: 10626050.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Brain Injuries, collegiate athletes, Computerized testing, ImPACT
@article{Asken2017a,
title = {Baseline Neurocognitive Performance and Clearance for Athletes to Return to Contact},
author = {Asken, Breton M and Clugston, James R and Snyder, Aliyah R and Bauer, Russell M},
doi = {10.4085/1062-6050-51.12.27},
isbn = {10626050},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
journal = {Journal of Athletic Training},
volume = {52},
number = {1},
pages = {51--57},
abstract = {Context: Computerized neurocognitive assessments are commonly used to manage sport-related concussion. Variations in baseline performance may influence neurocognitive performance after injury as well as the amount of time needed for an athlete to be cleared for return to sport participation. Objective: To investigate the relationship between mean baseline Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Test (ImPACT) scores and postconcussion reliable decline as well as the association between postconcussion cognitive decline and days missed after injury. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: University concussion databank. Patients or Other Participants: A total of 84 collegiate athleteswho sustained a concussion between 2008 and 2015were studied. For each ImPACT composite score (verbalmemory, visual memory, visualmotor speed, reaction time), athletes were grouped based on the presence or absence of reliable decline and on the presence of reliable decline in 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 cognitive domains. Main Outcome Measure(s): Outcome measures were baseline ImPACT composite scores and days missed due to concussion. Results: Athletes with a reliable decline in visual memory scored higher on baseline visual memory than did athletes with no decline or an improvement (t82=-2.348},
keywords = {Brain Injuries, collegiate athletes, Computerized testing, ImPACT},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Gaudet, C E; Weyandt, L L
Immediate Post-Concussion and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT): a systematic review of the prevalence and assessment of invalid performance Journal Article
In: Clinical Neuropsychologist, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 43–58, 2017.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Concussion assessment, ImPACT, invalid performance, malingering
@article{Gaudet2017,
title = {Immediate Post-Concussion and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT): a systematic review of the prevalence and assessment of invalid performance},
author = {Gaudet, C E and Weyandt, L L},
doi = {10.1080/13854046.2016.1220622},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
journal = {Clinical Neuropsychologist},
volume = {31},
number = {1},
pages = {43--58},
abstract = {Objective: Computerized neuropsychological assessment of concussion has rapidly expanded and Immediate Post-Concussion and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) is among the most commonly used measures in this domain. ImPACT was primarily developed for use with athletic populations but continues to expand beyond athletics to settings such as the workplace and schools where motivational dispositions may vary. The purpose of the present study was to conduct a systematic review of existing research investigating the prevalence of invalid baseline results and the effectiveness of ImPACT’s embedded invalidity indicators in detecting suspect effort. Method: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed in order to systematically structure a search across four databases and analysis of studies that presented data related to the prevalence of invalid performance and/or the effectiveness of ImPACT’s embedded invalidity indicators. Results: A total of 17 studies included prevalence rates of invalid performances or examined the effectiveness of ImPACT’s invalidity indicators. Of the 17 studies, 12 included prevalence rates of invalid baseline results; and across this group of studies (after removing an outlier), the weighted prevalence rate of invalid baseline results was 6%. Four of the 17 studies examined the effectiveness of ImPACT’s embedded invalidity indicators. ImPACT’s embedded invalidity indicators correctly identified suboptimal effort in approximately 80% of individuals instructed to perform poorly and avoid detection (‘coached’) or instructed to perform poorly (‘na\"{i}ve’). Conclusions: These findings raise a number of issues pertaining to the use of ImPACT. Invalid performance incidence may increase with large group versus individual administration, use in nonclinical settings, and among those with Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder or learning disability. Additionally, the older desktop version of ImPACT appears to be associated with a higher rate of invalid performances than the online version. Although ImPACT’s embedded invalidity indicators detect invalid performance at a rate of 6% on average, known group validity studies suggest that these measures miss invalid performance approximately 20% of the time when individuals purposefully underperform. © 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor \& Francis Group.},
keywords = {Concussion assessment, ImPACT, invalid performance, malingering},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Asken, Breton M; Clugston, James R; Snyder, Aliyah R; Bauer, Russell M
Baseline Neurocognitive Performance and Clearance for Athletes to Return to Contact Journal Article
In: Journal of Athletic Training, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 51–57, 2017, ISBN: 10626050.
@article{Asken2017a,
title = {Baseline Neurocognitive Performance and Clearance for Athletes to Return to Contact},
author = {Asken, Breton M and Clugston, James R and Snyder, Aliyah R and Bauer, Russell M},
doi = {10.4085/1062-6050-51.12.27},
isbn = {10626050},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
journal = {Journal of Athletic Training},
volume = {52},
number = {1},
pages = {51--57},
abstract = {Context: Computerized neurocognitive assessments are commonly used to manage sport-related concussion. Variations in baseline performance may influence neurocognitive performance after injury as well as the amount of time needed for an athlete to be cleared for return to sport participation. Objective: To investigate the relationship between mean baseline Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Test (ImPACT) scores and postconcussion reliable decline as well as the association between postconcussion cognitive decline and days missed after injury. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: University concussion databank. Patients or Other Participants: A total of 84 collegiate athleteswho sustained a concussion between 2008 and 2015were studied. For each ImPACT composite score (verbalmemory, visual memory, visualmotor speed, reaction time), athletes were grouped based on the presence or absence of reliable decline and on the presence of reliable decline in 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 cognitive domains. Main Outcome Measure(s): Outcome measures were baseline ImPACT composite scores and days missed due to concussion. Results: Athletes with a reliable decline in visual memory scored higher on baseline visual memory than did athletes with no decline or an improvement (t82=-2.348},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Gaudet, C E; Weyandt, L L
Immediate Post-Concussion and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT): a systematic review of the prevalence and assessment of invalid performance Journal Article
In: Clinical Neuropsychologist, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 43–58, 2017.
@article{Gaudet2017,
title = {Immediate Post-Concussion and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT): a systematic review of the prevalence and assessment of invalid performance},
author = {Gaudet, C E and Weyandt, L L},
doi = {10.1080/13854046.2016.1220622},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
journal = {Clinical Neuropsychologist},
volume = {31},
number = {1},
pages = {43--58},
abstract = {Objective: Computerized neuropsychological assessment of concussion has rapidly expanded and Immediate Post-Concussion and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) is among the most commonly used measures in this domain. ImPACT was primarily developed for use with athletic populations but continues to expand beyond athletics to settings such as the workplace and schools where motivational dispositions may vary. The purpose of the present study was to conduct a systematic review of existing research investigating the prevalence of invalid baseline results and the effectiveness of ImPACT’s embedded invalidity indicators in detecting suspect effort. Method: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed in order to systematically structure a search across four databases and analysis of studies that presented data related to the prevalence of invalid performance and/or the effectiveness of ImPACT’s embedded invalidity indicators. Results: A total of 17 studies included prevalence rates of invalid performances or examined the effectiveness of ImPACT’s invalidity indicators. Of the 17 studies, 12 included prevalence rates of invalid baseline results; and across this group of studies (after removing an outlier), the weighted prevalence rate of invalid baseline results was 6%. Four of the 17 studies examined the effectiveness of ImPACT’s embedded invalidity indicators. ImPACT’s embedded invalidity indicators correctly identified suboptimal effort in approximately 80% of individuals instructed to perform poorly and avoid detection (‘coached’) or instructed to perform poorly (‘na\"{i}ve’). Conclusions: These findings raise a number of issues pertaining to the use of ImPACT. Invalid performance incidence may increase with large group versus individual administration, use in nonclinical settings, and among those with Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder or learning disability. Additionally, the older desktop version of ImPACT appears to be associated with a higher rate of invalid performances than the online version. Although ImPACT’s embedded invalidity indicators detect invalid performance at a rate of 6% on average, known group validity studies suggest that these measures miss invalid performance approximately 20% of the time when individuals purposefully underperform. © 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor \& Francis Group.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Asken, Breton M; Clugston, James R; Snyder, Aliyah R; Bauer, Russell M
Baseline Neurocognitive Performance and Clearance for Athletes to Return to Contact Journal Article
In: Journal of Athletic Training, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 51–57, 2017, ISBN: 10626050.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Brain Injuries, collegiate athletes, Computerized testing, ImPACT
@article{Asken2017a,
title = {Baseline Neurocognitive Performance and Clearance for Athletes to Return to Contact},
author = {Asken, Breton M and Clugston, James R and Snyder, Aliyah R and Bauer, Russell M},
doi = {10.4085/1062-6050-51.12.27},
isbn = {10626050},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
journal = {Journal of Athletic Training},
volume = {52},
number = {1},
pages = {51--57},
abstract = {Context: Computerized neurocognitive assessments are commonly used to manage sport-related concussion. Variations in baseline performance may influence neurocognitive performance after injury as well as the amount of time needed for an athlete to be cleared for return to sport participation. Objective: To investigate the relationship between mean baseline Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Test (ImPACT) scores and postconcussion reliable decline as well as the association between postconcussion cognitive decline and days missed after injury. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: University concussion databank. Patients or Other Participants: A total of 84 collegiate athleteswho sustained a concussion between 2008 and 2015were studied. For each ImPACT composite score (verbalmemory, visual memory, visualmotor speed, reaction time), athletes were grouped based on the presence or absence of reliable decline and on the presence of reliable decline in 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 cognitive domains. Main Outcome Measure(s): Outcome measures were baseline ImPACT composite scores and days missed due to concussion. Results: Athletes with a reliable decline in visual memory scored higher on baseline visual memory than did athletes with no decline or an improvement (t82=-2.348},
keywords = {Brain Injuries, collegiate athletes, Computerized testing, ImPACT},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Gaudet, C E; Weyandt, L L
Immediate Post-Concussion and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT): a systematic review of the prevalence and assessment of invalid performance Journal Article
In: Clinical Neuropsychologist, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 43–58, 2017.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Concussion assessment, ImPACT, invalid performance, malingering
@article{Gaudet2017,
title = {Immediate Post-Concussion and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT): a systematic review of the prevalence and assessment of invalid performance},
author = {Gaudet, C E and Weyandt, L L},
doi = {10.1080/13854046.2016.1220622},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
journal = {Clinical Neuropsychologist},
volume = {31},
number = {1},
pages = {43--58},
abstract = {Objective: Computerized neuropsychological assessment of concussion has rapidly expanded and Immediate Post-Concussion and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) is among the most commonly used measures in this domain. ImPACT was primarily developed for use with athletic populations but continues to expand beyond athletics to settings such as the workplace and schools where motivational dispositions may vary. The purpose of the present study was to conduct a systematic review of existing research investigating the prevalence of invalid baseline results and the effectiveness of ImPACT’s embedded invalidity indicators in detecting suspect effort. Method: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed in order to systematically structure a search across four databases and analysis of studies that presented data related to the prevalence of invalid performance and/or the effectiveness of ImPACT’s embedded invalidity indicators. Results: A total of 17 studies included prevalence rates of invalid performances or examined the effectiveness of ImPACT’s invalidity indicators. Of the 17 studies, 12 included prevalence rates of invalid baseline results; and across this group of studies (after removing an outlier), the weighted prevalence rate of invalid baseline results was 6%. Four of the 17 studies examined the effectiveness of ImPACT’s embedded invalidity indicators. ImPACT’s embedded invalidity indicators correctly identified suboptimal effort in approximately 80% of individuals instructed to perform poorly and avoid detection (‘coached’) or instructed to perform poorly (‘na\"{i}ve’). Conclusions: These findings raise a number of issues pertaining to the use of ImPACT. Invalid performance incidence may increase with large group versus individual administration, use in nonclinical settings, and among those with Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder or learning disability. Additionally, the older desktop version of ImPACT appears to be associated with a higher rate of invalid performances than the online version. Although ImPACT’s embedded invalidity indicators detect invalid performance at a rate of 6% on average, known group validity studies suggest that these measures miss invalid performance approximately 20% of the time when individuals purposefully underperform. © 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor \& Francis Group.},
keywords = {Concussion assessment, ImPACT, invalid performance, malingering},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}