The Level and Nature of Impairment on the Iowa Gambling Task Following Acquired Brain Injury: A Meta-analysis.

IF 5.4 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES
Sammy Moore, Kristin Naragon-Gainey, Carmela F Pestell, Rodrigo Becerra, Melissa T Buelow, Danielle M Fynn, Michael Weinborn
{"title":"The Level and Nature of Impairment on the Iowa Gambling Task Following Acquired Brain Injury: A Meta-analysis.","authors":"Sammy Moore, Kristin Naragon-Gainey, Carmela F Pestell, Rodrigo Becerra, Melissa T Buelow, Danielle M Fynn, Michael Weinborn","doi":"10.1007/s11065-025-09668-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) is a popular measure of risky decision-making, but to date, no formal quantitative reviews have been conducted, focused exclusively on IGT performance amongst individuals with acquired brain injury (ABI). Therefore, this meta-analytic study firstly explored performance differences between individuals with ABI vs controls. Second, we extended this comparison by investigating differences in IGT scoring and interpretive approaches (e.g., total score vs later block analysis). Finally, we explored potential IGT performance moderators (e.g., average age). A total of 25 studies, containing 39 samples (total n = 2188), were included. Overall findings suggested that the IGT is sensitive to the presence of ABI, particularly non-TBI and medically confirmed TBI, which becomes evident by block 2 of 5. Medium effect sizes were obtained for IGT total score, as well as indicators using later blocks only. Performance moderators such as population type and region influenced IGT performance, whilst average age, average education, and proportion of males did not. These results indicate that the IGT is sensitive to decision-making impairment following ABI, although we conclude that further research is needed to confirm the IGT's ability to detect impairment relative to specific brain regions.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-025-09668-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) is a popular measure of risky decision-making, but to date, no formal quantitative reviews have been conducted, focused exclusively on IGT performance amongst individuals with acquired brain injury (ABI). Therefore, this meta-analytic study firstly explored performance differences between individuals with ABI vs controls. Second, we extended this comparison by investigating differences in IGT scoring and interpretive approaches (e.g., total score vs later block analysis). Finally, we explored potential IGT performance moderators (e.g., average age). A total of 25 studies, containing 39 samples (total n = 2188), were included. Overall findings suggested that the IGT is sensitive to the presence of ABI, particularly non-TBI and medically confirmed TBI, which becomes evident by block 2 of 5. Medium effect sizes were obtained for IGT total score, as well as indicators using later blocks only. Performance moderators such as population type and region influenced IGT performance, whilst average age, average education, and proportion of males did not. These results indicate that the IGT is sensitive to decision-making impairment following ABI, although we conclude that further research is needed to confirm the IGT's ability to detect impairment relative to specific brain regions.

获得性脑损伤后爱荷华赌博任务损伤的水平和性质:一项荟萃分析。
爱荷华赌博任务(IGT)是一种流行的风险决策测量方法,但迄今为止,还没有进行过正式的定量评估,专门关注获得性脑损伤(ABI)个体的IGT表现。因此,本荟萃分析研究首先探讨了ABI个体与对照组之间的绩效差异。其次,我们通过调查IGT评分和解释方法(例如,总分与后块分析)的差异来扩展这一比较。最后,我们探讨了潜在的IGT性能调节因素(例如,平均年龄)。共纳入25项研究,39份样本(总n = 2188)。总体结果表明,IGT对ABI的存在很敏感,特别是非TBI和医学上证实的TBI,这在block 2 / 5中变得明显。对于IGT总分,以及仅使用后块的指标,获得中等效应量。人口类型和地区等绩效调节因素影响IGT绩效,而平均年龄、平均教育程度和男性比例则没有影响。这些结果表明,IGT对ABI后的决策损伤很敏感,尽管我们得出结论,需要进一步的研究来证实IGT检测与特定大脑区域相关的损伤的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neuropsychology Review
Neuropsychology Review 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
1.70%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Neuropsychology Review is a quarterly, refereed publication devoted to integrative review papers on substantive content areas in neuropsychology, with particular focus on populations with endogenous or acquired conditions affecting brain and function and on translational research providing a mechanistic understanding of clinical problems. Publication of new data is not the purview of the journal. Articles are written by international specialists in the field, discussing such complex issues as distinctive functional features of central nervous system disease and injury; challenges in early diagnosis; the impact of genes and environment on function; risk factors for functional impairment; treatment efficacy of neuropsychological rehabilitation; the role of neuroimaging, neuroelectrophysiology, and other neurometric modalities in explicating function; clinical trial design; neuropsychological function and its substrates characteristic of normal development and aging; and neuropsychological dysfunction and its substrates in neurological, psychiatric, and medical conditions. The journal''s broad perspective is supported by an outstanding, multidisciplinary editorial review board guided by the aim to provide students and professionals, clinicians and researchers with scholarly articles that critically and objectively summarize and synthesize the strengths and weaknesses in the literature and propose novel hypotheses, methods of analysis, and links to other fields.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信