A review of the validity of computerized neurocognitive assessment tools in mild traumatic brain injury assessment.

Q3 Medicine
Concussion Pub Date : 2017-01-30 eCollection Date: 2017-03-01 DOI:10.2217/cnc-2016-0021
Jacques P Arrieux, Wesley R Cole, Angelica P Ahrens
{"title":"A review of the validity of computerized neurocognitive assessment tools in mild traumatic brain injury assessment.","authors":"Jacques P Arrieux,&nbsp;Wesley R Cole,&nbsp;Angelica P Ahrens","doi":"10.2217/cnc-2016-0021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Computerized neurocognitive assessment tools (NCATs) offer potential advantages over traditional neuropsychological tests in postconcussion assessments. However, their psychometric properties and clinical utility are still questionable. The body of research regarding the validity and clinical utility of NCATs suggests some support for aspects of validity (e.g., convergent validity) and some ability to distinguish between concussed individuals and controls, though there are still questions regarding the validity of these tests and their clinical utility, especially outside of the acute injury timeframe. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive summary of the existing validity literature for four commonly used and studied NCATs (automated neuropsychological assessment metrics, CNS vital signs, cogstate and immediate post-concussion and cognitive testing) and lay the groundwork for future investigations.</p>","PeriodicalId":37006,"journal":{"name":"Concussion","volume":"2 1","pages":"CNC31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2217/cnc-2016-0021","citationCount":"46","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Concussion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2217/cnc-2016-0021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 46

Abstract

Computerized neurocognitive assessment tools (NCATs) offer potential advantages over traditional neuropsychological tests in postconcussion assessments. However, their psychometric properties and clinical utility are still questionable. The body of research regarding the validity and clinical utility of NCATs suggests some support for aspects of validity (e.g., convergent validity) and some ability to distinguish between concussed individuals and controls, though there are still questions regarding the validity of these tests and their clinical utility, especially outside of the acute injury timeframe. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive summary of the existing validity literature for four commonly used and studied NCATs (automated neuropsychological assessment metrics, CNS vital signs, cogstate and immediate post-concussion and cognitive testing) and lay the groundwork for future investigations.

计算机神经认知评估工具在轻度外伤性脑损伤评估中的有效性综述。
在脑震荡后评估中,计算机化神经认知评估工具(NCATs)比传统的神经心理测试具有潜在的优势。然而,它们的心理测量特性和临床应用仍有疑问。关于NCATs的有效性和临床应用的研究表明,一些方面的有效性(例如,趋同效度)和一些区分脑震荡个体和对照组的能力得到了一些支持,尽管这些测试的有效性及其临床应用仍然存在问题,特别是在急性损伤时间范围之外。在本文中,我们对四种常用和研究的NCATs(自动神经心理评估指标、中枢神经系统生命体征、认知状态和脑震荡后立即认知测试)的现有效度文献进行了全面总结,并为未来的研究奠定了基础。
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
Concussion
Concussion Medicine-Neurology (clinical)
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信