Cited by 25Traumatic Brain Injury ResearchCognitive Functions and MemoryCognitive Abilities and Testing

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Cognitive training approaches to remediate attention and executive dysfunction after traumatic brain injury: A single-case series

Dymowski, Alicia Rhian, Ponsford, Jennie Louise, Willmott, Catherine·2016·Neuropsychological Rehabilitation

Abstract

Attentional deficits are common following traumatic brain injury (TBI) and interfere with daily functioning. This study employed a single-case design to examine the effects of individualised strategy training on attention beyond the effects of computerised training using Attention Process Training 3 (APT-3), and to examine the participants' subjective experience of these approaches. An ABCA (baseline, APT-3, strategy training, follow-up) design was repeated across three participants with severe TBI. Outcomes were measured on alternate versions of the oral Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) and cancellation tasks; generalisation with the Test of Everyday Attention (TEA) and self and significant other (SO) ratings on the Rating Scale of Attentional Behaviour (RSAB); and participant experiences with semi-structured interviews. Planned Tau-U analyses revealed improvements in speed of processing on the SDMT and the automatic condition of the cancellation task after APT-3 and at follow-up, but with most improvement after strategy training. Limited generalisation was evident on TEA subtests and self-RSAB ratings. SO-RSAB ratings were mixed after APT-3, but demonstrated improvement after strategy training. Variability in attentional deficits and everyday attentional requirements between patients required individualised goals and approaches to rehabilitation. This study highlights the need for individualised rehabilitation of attention to improve everyday functioning after TBI.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09602011.2015.1102746

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 47 · Cited by 25

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Bayley M., 2007, ABIKUS Evidence based recommendations for rehabilitation of moderate to severe acquired brain injury
  2. Robertson I. H., 1996, Goal Management Training: A clinical manual
  3. Ruff R. M., 1995, Ruff 2 & 7 Selective Attention Test
  4. Sloan S., 2013, Traumatic brain injury: Rehabilitation for everyday adaptive living, 99
  5. Sohlberg M. M., 2003, Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 11, xix
  6. Sohlberg M. M., 2010, APT-III Attention Process Training: A direct training program for persons with acquired brain injury

Metadata

Authors
Dymowski, A. R., Ponsford, J. L., & Willmott, C.
Affiliations
  • Monash University (AU)
  • The Alfred Hospital (AU)
Corresponding author
Dymowski, Alicia Rhian
Venue
Neuropsychological Rehabilitation
Published
2015-10-23
Volume
26
Issue
5-6
Pages
866-894
ISSN
  • 0960-2011 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0694
OpenAlex
W2345129398
Cited by
25
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2
FWCI
2.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuropsychological Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Epworth Research Institute (80940)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
Keywords
traumatic brain injury, attention deficits, executive dysfunction, cognitive training, strategy training, individualised rehabilitation, Symbol Digit Modalities Test, cancellation task, processing speed
MeSH terms
Neurological Rehabilitation, Brain Injuries, Traumatic, Cognitive Remediation, Adult, Attention, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Young Adult, Executive Function

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