The Evidence Base of Neuropsychological Rehabilitation in Acquired Brain Impairment (ABI): How Good is the Research?
Abstract
In the context of evidence-based clinical practice (EBCP), the reliability of empirical data is largely determined by the methodological quality of research design. PsycBITE™ (Psychological Database of Brain Impairment Treatment Efficacy) is a web-based database listing all published, empirical reports on the effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions for the psychological consequences of acquired brain impairment (ABI). The aim of this study was to survey the listings of PsycBITE™ and examine the methodological quality of the reports it contains. Reports listed in PsycBITE™ include systematic reviews (SRs), randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, case series (CSs) and single-subject designs (SSDs). They are indexed according to research design, neurological group, patient age group, target area and intervention type. The PEDro Scale is used to rate the methodological quality of RCTs, nonRCTs and CSs, with maximum obtainable methodological quality rating (MQR) of 10/10, 8/10 and 2/10 respectively. A search identified 1298 reports indexed in PsycBITE™. The largest proportion was SSDs (39%), followed by CSs (22%), RCTs (21%), non-RCTs (11%) and SRs (7%). The majority of reports was concerned with stroke (41%), traumatic brain injury (29%) and Alzheimer's and related dementias (22%). The most frequently investigated deficits were communication/language/speech disorders (24%); independent/self-care activities (19%); behaviour problems (17%); memory impairments (17%)…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
For TBI rehabilitation, less than 30% of practitioners consult the literature to determine their choice of intervention.
“Our research (Perdices et al., 2006) shows that for TBI rehabilitation, less than 30% of practitioners consult the literature to determine their choice of intervention.”
From Moving ahead: A new centre of research excellence in brain recovery, focusing on psychosocial reintegration following traumatic brain injury (2012) · cites this paper as Perdices et al., 2006
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Tate, R. L., Perdices, M., Rosenkoetter, U., McDonald, S., Togher, L., Shadish, W., Horner, R., Kratochwill, T., Barlow, D. H., Kazdin, A., et al. (2016) · Archives of Scientific Psychology · doi:10.1037/arc0000027 · Cited by 219 · see citing works
Self-citationKangas, M., & McDonald, S. (2011) · Neuropsychological Rehabilitation · doi:10.1080/09602011.2010.540920 · Cited by 133 · see citing works
Self-citationColeman, J. J., Frymark, T., Franceschini, N. M., & Theodoros, D. G. (2015) · American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology · doi:10.1044/2015_ajslp-14-0028 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
McDonald, S., Anderson, V., Ponsford, J., Tate, R., Togher, L., Morgan, A., Fleming, J., Ownsworth, T., Douglas, J., & Murdoch, B. (2012) · Brain Impairment · doi:10.1017/brimp.2012.21 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Perdices, M., Schultz, R., Tate, R., McDonald, S., Togher, L., Savage, S., Winders, K., & Smith, K.
- Affiliations
- Royal North Shore Hospital (AU)
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- UNSW Sydney (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Perdices, Michael
- Venue
- Brain Impairment
- Publisher
- CSIRO Publishing
- Published
- 2006-09-01
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 119-132
- ISSN
- 1443-9646 (ISSN-L)
- 1839-5252
- OpenAlex
- W2053642408
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 3.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Brain Impairment (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
- Keywords
- neuropsychological rehabilitation, methodological quality, research quality, PEDro scale, non-pharmacological treatment, stroke, traumatic brain injury, dementia, communication disorders, single-case experimental design, case series, evidence-based practice, research trends over time, publication bias, memory impairment
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
