4.1 Article

An index predictive of cognitive outcome in retired professional American Football players with a history of sports concussion

Journal

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/13803395.2016.1139057

Keywords

Traumatic brain injury; Cognitive reserve; Cerebral concussion; Sports; Cognition

Funding

  1. National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment
  2. National Center for Research Resources, USA [M01 RR 19975]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Various concussion characteristics and personal factors are associated with cognitive recovery in athletes. We developed an index based on concussion frequency, severity, and timeframe, as well as cognitive reserve (CR), and we assessed its predictive power regarding cognitive ability in retired professional football players. Method: Data from 40 retired professional American football players were used in the current study. On average, participants had been retired from football for 20 years. Current neuropsychological performances, indicators of CR, concussion history, and play data were used to create an index for predicting cognitive outcome. Results: The sample displayed a range of concussions, concussion severities, seasons played, CR, and cognitive ability. Many of the participants demonstrated cognitive deficits. The index strongly predicted global cognitive ability (R-2 = .31). The index also predicted the number of areas of neuropsychological deficit, which varied as a function of the deficit classification system used (Heaton: R-2 = .15; Wechsler: R-2 = .28). Conclusions: The current study demonstrated that a unique combination of CR, sports concussion, and game-related data can predict cognitive outcomes in participants who had been retired from professional American football for an average of 20 years. Such indices may prove to be useful for clinical decision making and research.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available