Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 322

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Recommendations for the Use of Common Outcome Measures in Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury Research

Open access
McCauley, Stephen R., Wilde, Elisabeth A., Anderson, Vicki A., Bedell, Gary, Beers, Sue R., Campbell, Thomas F., Chapman, Sandra B., Ewing-Cobbs, Linda, Gerring, Joan P., Gioia, Gerard A., Levin, Harvey S., Michaud, Linda J., Prasad, Mary R., Swaine, Bonnie R., Turkstra, Lyn S., Wade, Shari L., Yeates, Keith O.·2012·Journal of Neurotrauma
DOI 10.1089/neu.2011.1838
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article addresses the need for age-relevant outcome measures for traumatic brain injury (TBI) research and summarizes the recommendations by the inter-agency Pediatric TBI Outcomes Workgroup. The Pediatric Workgroup's recommendations address primary clinical research objectives including characterizing course of recovery from TBI, prediction of later outcome, measurement of treatment effects, and comparison of outcomes across studies. Consistent with other Common Data Elements (CDE) Workgroups, the Pediatric TBI Outcomes Workgroup adopted the standard three-tier system in its selection of measures. In the first tier, core measures included valid, robust, and widely applicable outcome measures with proven utility in pediatric TBI from each identified domain including academics, adaptive and daily living skills, family and environment, global outcome, health-related quality of life, infant and toddler measures, language and communication, neuropsychological impairment, physical functioning, psychiatric and psychological functioning, recovery of consciousness, social role participation and social competence, social cognition, and TBI-related symptoms. In the second tier, supplemental measures were recommended for consideration in TBI research focusing on specific topics or populations. In the third tier, emerging measures included important instruments currently under development, in the process of validation, or nearing the point of published findings that have significant potential to be superior to measures in the core and supplemental lists and may eventually replace them as evidence for their utility emerges.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/neu.2011.1838

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 322

Metadata

Authors
McCauley, S. R., Wilde, E. A., Anderson, V. A., Bedell, G., Beers, S. R., Campbell, T. F., Chapman, S. B., Ewing-Cobbs, L., Gerring, J. P., Gioia, G. A., Levin, H. S., Michaud, L. J., Prasad, M. R., Swaine, B. R., Turkstra, L. S., Wade, S. L., & Yeates, K. O.
Venue
Journal of Neurotrauma
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2012-03
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
678-705
ISSN
  • 0897-7151 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-9042
DOI
10.1089/neu.2011.1838
OpenAlex
W2027039935
Cited by
322
References
32
FWCI
10.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.