Cited by 36Traumatic Brain Injury ResearchTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesCognitive Functions and Memory

Evaluation of extent and pattern of neurocognitive functions in mild and moderate traumatic brain injury patients by using Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score as a screening tool: An observational study from India

Panwar, Naresh, Purohit, Devendra, Deo Sinha, Virendra, Joshi, Mrinal·2019·Asian Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Introduction Cognitive impairment is one of the most important culprit influencing the long-term neurological outcome commonlyobserved in TBI survivors. Aims To examine the performance of patients with Mild and Moderate traumatic brain injury (TBI) on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) using as a screening tool. Results Total 228 (127 Mild TBI & 101 Moderate TBI) patients were recruited in this study. Results showed that patients with moderate TBI had lower score on the MoCA as compared to patients with mild TBI (p Value = 0.031). This difference was observed statistically significant among mild and moderate TBI for the cube copy (p = 0.039) and clock (p = 0.017) i.e. visuospatial/executive function, Digit span test (p value = 0.040) i.e. concentration and recall memory (p = 0.04). MoCA Score were higher for patients with higher GCS score at admission. Education status was also correlated with MoCA scores; those patients with higher level of education had significant association with higher MoCA scores (p value = 0.012). This study showed that age and gender were insignificant variables to determine cognitive function. Conclusion Assessment of cognitive impairment should be considered as a mandatory protocol while evaluating post TBI patients, even in cases of mild TBI. Visuospatial/Executive function, memory and attention are the most commonly impaired cognitive functions in patients of TBI, and these are the main domain of cognition which differentiates mild impairmen…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajp.2018.08.007

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Panwar, N., Purohit, D., Deo Sinha, V., & Joshi, M.
Affiliations
SMS Medical College (IN)
Corresponding author
Purohit, Devendra
Venue
Asian Journal of Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-03
Volume
41
Pages
60-65
ISSN
1876-2018 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2886543213
Cited by
36
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3
FWCI
1.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Asian Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
traumatic brain injury, mild traumatic brain injury, moderate traumatic brain injury, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, cognitive impairment, cognitive screening, visuospatial/executive function, memory impairment, attention, educational attainment, Glasgow Coma Scale, post-traumatic rehabilitation
MeSH terms
Brain Injuries, Traumatic, Mental Status and Dementia Tests, Adult, Brain Concussion, Female, Humans, India, Male, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Cognitive Dysfunction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review