5 results
64 Comparison of Post-Concussion Symptom Network Structure at Baseline and Post-Concussion
- Christine Salva, Grace J Goodwin, Hana Kuwabara, Jessica Woodyatt, Julia E Maietta, Thomas Kinsora, Staci Ross, Daniel N Allen
-
- Journal:
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society / Volume 29 / Issue s1 / November 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 December 2023, pp. 169-170
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Objective:
Recent conceptualizations of concussion symptoms have begun to shift from a latent perspective (which suggests a common cause; i.e., head injury), to a network perspective (where symptoms influence and interact with each other throughout injury and recovery). Recent research has examined the network structure of the Post-Concussion Symptom Scale (PCSS) cross-sectionally at pre-and post-concussion, with the most important symptoms including dizziness, sadness, and feeling more emotional. However, within-subject comparisons between network structures at pre-and post-concussion have yet to be made. These analyses can provide invaluable information on whether concussion alters symptom interactions. This study examined within-athlete changes in PCSS network connectivity and centrality (the importance of different symptoms within the networks) from baseline to post-concussion.
Participants and Methods:Participants were selected from a larger longitudinal database of high school athletes who completed the PCSS in English as part of their standard athletic training protocol (N=1,561). The PCSS is a 22-item self-report measure of common concussion symptoms (i.e., headache, vomiting, dizziness, etc.) in which individuals rate symptom severity on a 7-point Likert scale. Participants were excluded if they endorsed history of brain surgery, neurodevelopmental disorder, or treatment history for epilepsy, migraines, psychiatric disorders, or alcohol/substance use. Network analysis was conducted on PCSS ratings from a baseline and acute post-concussion (within 72-hours post-injury) assessment. In each network, the nodes represented individual symptoms, and the edges connecting them their partial correlations. Estimations of the regularized partial correlation networks were completed using the Gaussian graphical model, and the GLASSO algorithm was used for regularization. Each symptom’s expected influence (the sum of its partial correlations with other symptoms) was calculated to identify the most central symptoms in each network. Recommended techniques from Epskamp et al. (2018) were completed for assessing the accuracy of the estimated symptom importance and relationships. Network Comparison Tests were conducted to observe changes in network connectivity, structure, and node influence.
Results:Both baseline and acute post-concussion networks contained negative and positive relationships. The expected influence of symptoms was stable in both networks, with difficulty concentrating having the greatest expected influence in both. The strongest edges in the networks were between symptoms within similar domains of functioning (e.g., sleeping less was associated with trouble falling asleep). Network connectivity was not significantly different between networks (S=0.43), suggesting the overall degree to which symptoms are related was not different at acute post-concussion. Network structure significantly differed at acute post-concussion (M=0.305), suggesting specific relationships in the acute post-concussion network were different than they were at baseline. In the acute post concussion network, vomiting was less central and sensitivity to noise and mentally foggy more central.
Conclusions:PCSS network structure at acute post-concussion is altered, suggesting concussion may disrupt symptom networks and certain symptoms’ associations with the experience of others after sustaining a concussive injury. Future research should compare PCSS networks later in recovery to examine if similar structural changes remain or return to baseline structure, with the potential that observing PCSS network structure changes post-concussion could inform symptom resolution trajectories.
18 Measurement Invariance of ImPACT in Bilingual and Monolingual High School Athletes
- Hana Kuwabara, Grace Goodwin, Christine Salva, Jessica Woodyatt, Julia Maietta, Staci Ross, Thomas Kinsora, Daniel Allen
-
- Journal:
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society / Volume 29 / Issue s1 / November 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 December 2023, pp. 432-433
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Objective:
Previous studies have found differences between monolingual and bilingual athletes on ImPACT, the most widely used sport-related concussion (SRC) assessment measure. Most recently, results suggest that monolingual English-Speaking athletes outperformed bilingual English- and Spanish-speaking athletes on Visual Motor Speed and Reaction Time composites. Before further investigation of these differences can occur, measurement invariance of ImPACT must be established to ensure that differences are not attributable to measurement error. The current study aimed to 1) replicate a recently identified four-factor model using cognitive subtest scores of ImPACT on baseline assessments in monolingual English-Speaking athletes and bilingual English- and Spanish-speaking athletes and 2) to establish measurement invariance across groups.
Participants and Methods:Participants included high school athletes who were administered the ImPACT as part of their standard pre-season athletic training protocol in English. Participants were excluded if they had a self-reported history of concussion, Autism, ADHD, learning disability or treatment history of epilepsy/seizures, brain surgery, meningitis, psychiatric disorders, or substance/alcohol use. The final sample included 7,948 monolingual English-speaking athletes and 7,938 bilingual English- and Spanish-speaking athletes with valid baseline assessments. Language variables were based on self-report. As the number of monolingual athletes was substantially larger than the number of bilingual athletes, monolingual athletes were randomly selected from a larger sample to match the bilingual athletes on age, sex, and sport. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to test competing models, including one-factor, two-factor, and three-factor models to determine if a recently identified four-factor model (Visual Memory, Visual Reaction Time, Verbal Memory, Working Memory) provided the best fit of the data. Eighteen subtest scores from ImPACT were used in the CFAs. Through increasingly restrictive multigroup CFAs (MGCFA), configural, metric, scalar, and residual levels of invariance were assessed by language group.
Results:CFA indicated that the four-factor model provided the best fit in the monolingual and bilingual samples compared to competing models. However, some goodness-of-fit-statistics were below recommended cutoffs, and thus, post-hoc model modifications were made on a theoretical basis and by examination of modification indices. The modified four-factor model had adequate to superior fit and met criteria for all goodness-of-fit indices and was retained as the configural model to test measurement invariance across language groups. MGCFA revealed that residual invariance, the strictest level of invariance, was achieved across groups.
Conclusions:This study provides support for a modified four-factor model as estimating the latent structure of ImPACT cognitive scores in monolingual English-speaking and bilingual English- and Spanish-speaking high school athletes at baseline assessment. Results further suggest that differences between monolingual English-speaking and bilingual English- and Spanish-speaking athletes reported in prior ImPACT studies are not caused by measurement error. The reason for these differences remains unclear but are consistent with other studies suggesting monolingual advantages. Given the increase in bilingual individuals in the United States, and among high school athletics, future research should investigate other sources of error such as item bias and predictive validity to further understand if group differences reflect real differences between these athletes.
Influence of Special Education, ADHD, Autism, and Learning Disorders on ImPACT Validity Scores in High School Athletes
- Julia E. Maietta, Kimberly A. Barchard, Hana C. Kuwabara, Bradley D. Donohue, Staci R. Ross, Thomas F. Kinsora, Daniel N. Allen
-
- Journal:
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society / Volume 27 / Issue 5 / May 2021
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 09 December 2020, pp. 461-471
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Objective:
The Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) is commonly used to assist with post-concussion return-to-play decisions for athletes. Additional investigation is needed to determine whether embedded indicators used to determine the validity of scores are influenced by the presence of neurodevelopmental disorders (NDs).
Method:This study examined standard and novel ImPACT validity indicators in a large sample of high school athletes (n = 33,772) with or without self-reported ND.
Results:Overall, 7.1% of athletes’ baselines were judged invalid based on standard ImPACT validity criteria. When analyzed by group (healthy, ND), there were significantly more invalid ImPACT baselines for athletes with an ND diagnosis or special education history (between 9.7% and 54.3% for standard and novel embedded validity criteria) when compared to athletes without NDs. ND history was a significant predictor of invalid baseline performance above and beyond other demographic characteristics (i.e., age, sex, and sport), although it accounted for only a small percentage of variance. Multivariate base rates are presented stratified for age, sex, and ND.
Conclusions:These data provide evidence of higher than normal rates of invalid baselines in athletes who report ND (based on both the standard and novel embedded validity indicators). Although ND accounted for a small percentage of variance in the prediction of invalid performance, negative consequences (e.g., extended time out of sports) of incorrect decision-making should be considered for those with neurodevelopmental conditions. Also, reasons for the overall increase noted here, such as decreased motivation, “sandbagging”, or disability-related cognitive deficit, require additional investigation.
Perspectives of scientists on disseminating research findings to non-research audiences
- Demetria M. McNeal, Russell E. Glasgow, Ross C. Brownson, Daniel D. Matlock, Pamela N. Peterson, Stacie L. Daugherty, Christopher E. Knoepke
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 5 / Issue 1 / 2021
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 07 December 2020, e61
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Background:
Little is known about practices used to disseminate findings to non-research, practitioner audiences. This study describes the perspectives, experience and activities of dissemination & implementation (D&I) scientists around disseminating their research findings.
Methods:The study explored D&I scientists’ experiences and recommendations for assessment of dissemination activities to non-research audiences. Existing list serves were used to recruit scientists. Respondents were asked three open-ended questions on an Internet survey about dissemination activities, recommendations for changing evaluation systems and suggestions to improve their own dissemination of their work.
Results:Surveys were completed by 159 scientists reporting some training, funding and/or publication history in D&I. Three themes emerged across each of the three open-ended questions. Question 1 on evaluation generated the themes of: 1a) promotional review; 1b) funding requirements and 1c) lack of acknowledgement of dissemination activities. Question 2 on recommended changes generated the themes of: 2a) dissemination as a requirement of the academic promotion process; 2b) requirement of dissemination plan and 2c) dissemination metrics. Question 3 on personal changes to improve dissemination generated the themes of: 3a) allocation of resources for dissemination activities; 3b) emerging dissemination channels and 3c) identify and address issues of priority for stakeholders.
Conclusions:Our findings revealed different types of issues D&I scientists encounter when disseminating findings to clinical, public health or policy audiences and their suggestions to improve the process. Future research should consider key requirements which determine academic promotion and grant funding as an opportunity to expand dissemination efforts.
5 - Measuring Responses to Nonverbal Social Signals: Research on Affect Receiving Ability
- from Part I - Conceptual Models of Social Signals
-
- By Ross Buck, University of Connecticut, Mike Miller, Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Stacie Renfro Powers, Philliber Research Associates
- Edited by Judee K. Burgoon, University of Arizona, Nadia Magnenat-Thalmann, Université de Genève, Maja Pantic, Imperial College London, Alessandro Vinciarelli, University of Glasgow
-
- Book:
- Social Signal Processing
- Published online:
- 13 July 2017
- Print publication:
- 08 May 2017, pp 46-55
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Facial and bodily expressions function as social signals: communicative displays of affect that regulate social interaction. It has long been recognized that abilities to read such signals accurately is a kind of social intelligence, distinct from the traditional IQ. An understanding and valid and reliable measures assessing such abilities would be very useful. In recent years a number of techniques have been developed for the automatic analysis of the stream of affect display across time, including facial expressions, body movements and postures, and vocalic analyses. Such techniques enable the efficient and objective recording of the dynamic stream of display and are of immense value, permitting the analysis of the detailed structure of nonverbal “body language” as never before. Potential exists for applications that help to assess the detailed structure of nonverbal receiving abilities: for example, the nature of specific cues that underlie accurate or inaccurate judgment on the part of different receivers.
This chapter considers the conceptual foundations and assumptions underlying measures of social signal pickup and processing, and the current developments art including specific measures that have been proposed. A major challenge is that current approaches are almost exclusively based upon posed or enacted facial and bodily displays, many of them static rather than dynamic. There is much evidence that static and/or posed displays differ from dynamic spontaneous displays involving the authentic experience of emotion on the part of the sender. Evidence suggests that the processing of spontaneous versus posed displays differs as well. A second concern of this chapter involves the concept of emotion sonar: that in interactive situations the tone is set by the display behavior of the sender more than the interpretive skills of the receiver. Given attention, displays are “picked up” automatically, affording mutual contingent responsiveness and enabling primary intersubjectivity vis-á-vis sender and receiver in which each is constantly attuned to the subjective state displayed by the other. Finally, we will consider evidence of the role of the neurohormone oxytocin (OT) in responsiveness to social signals.
Measuring Abilities to “Read” Social Signals
Person Perception Accuracy
Attempts to measure abilities at social recognition, also termed person perception accuracy, date from the 1920s. However, early attempts were frustrated by methodological problems.