Search

We developed a reporting guideline to provide authors with guidance about what should be reported when writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal using a particular type of research design: the single-case experimental design. This report describes the methods used to develop the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016. As a result of 2 online surveys and a 2-day meeting of experts, the SCRIBE 2016 checklist was developed, which is a set of 26 items that authors need to address when writing about single-case research. This article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated. We recommend that the SCRIBE 2016 is used by authors preparing manuscripts describing single-case research for publication, as well as journal reviewers and editors who are evaluating such manuscripts.

Executive function is best measured in loosely structured, multi-component tasks that reflect real-life demands. These tasks require participants to develop a strategy, keep a plan in mind and monitor time. Errors include ignoring stated goals ("goal neglect"), over-allocation of time to one task and violating rules. Teasing apart such errors can be complicated and these assessments can be difficult to control and time-consuming to administer. This paper reports an evaluation of a new, easy-to-administer computer-based multiple component test, the Computerised Multiple Elements Test (CMET). In Study 1 20 older adults (55-70 years) completed the task under different conditions. Study 2 examines the relationships between CMET and performance on measures of related constructs. The results show that poor CMET performance correlated with self-reported frequency of everyday cognitive lapses. There is a reasonable basis for further exploration of the CMET as a quick, practical and potentially sensitive measure of organisational skills.

Aim: A systematic review to identify which mood and depression measures are valid for use with people with severe cognitive and communication impairments following severe acquired brain injury. Method: A systematic search of Cochrane, Web of Science, Ovid, and EBSCOhost was performed in March 2020, July 2021, and September 2022. The search focused on self-report and observer-rated assessment tools used to assess mood, depression, and/or distress in those described as having a severe acquired brain injury. Psychometric properties were extracted using the Consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments (COSMIN) risk of bias checklist. Qualitative synthesis was performed on extracted patient data. Results: Nineteen papers detailing the psychometric properties of 25 measures were included, involving 2,914 participants. Nine papers provided details confirming the severity of participants' cognitive and communication impairments. The remaining papers described including severely injured participants but provided limited details so that precise level of severity could not be confirmed. Only one paper showed evidence of adequate psychometric properties and included those with severe cognitive impairments in a study of two observer-rated measures, the Stroke Aphasia Depression Questionnaire (10 items) and the Aphasia Depression Rating Scale. Conclusions: Due to the exclusion of individuals with severe cognitive and communication consequences following brain injury, no studies using self-report measures showed adequate validity evidence to recommend their use in this population. A small study using two observer-rated scales included those with severe cognitive impairments and showed satisfactory evidence that these measures can be validly used with this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

If single-case experimental designs are to be used to establish guidelines for evidence-based interventions in clinical and educational settings, numerical values that reflect treatment effect sizes are required. The present study compares four recently developed procedures for quantifying the magnitude of intervention effect using data with known characteristics. Monte Carlo methods were used to generate AB designs data with potential confounding variables (serial dependence, linear and curvilinear trend, and heteroscedasticity between phases) and two types of treatment effect (level and slope change). The results suggest that data features are important for choosing the appropriate procedure and, thus, inspecting the graphed data visually is a necessary initial stage. In the presence of serial dependence or a change in data variability, the nonoverlap of all pairs (NAP) and the slope and level change (SLC) were the only techniques of the four examined that performed adequately. Introducing a data correction step in NAP renders it unaffected by linear trend, as is also the case for the percentage of nonoverlapping corrected data and SLC. The performance of these techniques indicates that professionals' judgments concerning treatment effectiveness can be readily complemented by both visual and statistical analyses. A flowchart to guide selection of techniques according to the data characteristics identified by visual inspection is provided. (Contains 9 tables and 2 figures.)

Improvements in patient outcomes and mortality after brain injury alongside increasing ageing population have resulted in an increasing need to develop cognitive interventions for individuals experiencing changes in their cognitive function. One topic of increasing research interest is whether cognitive functions such as attention, memory and executive functioning can be improved through the use of working memory training interventions. Both clinical and neuroimaging researchers are working to evidence this, but their efforts rarely come together. We discuss here several issues that may be hindering progress in this area, including the tools researchers utilize to measure cognition, the choice between employing active or passive control groups, the focus on transfer effects at the expense of well-characterized training effects, and the overall lack of neuroimaging studies in individuals with neurological disorders. We argue that the only way to advance the field is to build bridges between the disciplines of clinical neuropsychology and cognitive neuroscience. We suggest a multi-level framework to validate the efficacy of working memory interventions and other forms of cognitive training that combine both clinical and neuroimaging approaches. We conclude that in order to move forward we need to form multidisciplinary teams, employ interdisciplinary methods, brain imaging quality rating tools and build national and international collaborations based on open science principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Social cognition is frequently impaired following an acquired brain injury (ABI) but often overlooked in clinical assessments. There are few validated and appropriate measures of social cognitive abilities for ABI patients. The current study examined the validity of the Edinburgh Social Cognition Test (ESCoT, Baksh et al., 2018) in measuring social cognition following an ABI. Methods: Forty-one patients with ABI were recruited from a rehabilitation service and completed measures of general ability, executive functions and social cognition (Faux Pas; FP, Reading the Mind in the Eyes; RME, Social Norms Questionnaire; SNQ and the ESCoT). Forty-one controls matched on age, sex and years of education also performed the RME, SNQ and ESCoT. Results: A diagnosis of ABI was significantly associated with poorer performance on all ESCoT measures and RME while adjusting for age, sex and years of education. In ABI patients, the ESCoT showed good internal consistency with its subcomponents and performance correlated with the other measures of social cognition demonstrating convergent validity. Better Trail Making Test performance predicted better ESCoT total, RME and SNQ scores. Higher TOPF IQ was associated with higher RME scores, while higher WAIS-IV working memory predicted better FP performance. Conclusions: The ESCoT is a brief, valid and internally consistent assessment tool able to detect social cognition deficits in neurological patients. Given the prevalence of social cognition deficits in ABI and the marked impact these can have on an individual's recovery, this assessment can be a helpful addition to a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to establish the extent to which memory rehabilitation is carried out by Community Psychiatric Nurses (CPNs) working with dementia; to investigate awareness and knowledge of memory rehabilitation and memory processes amongst CPNs; and to explore the factors that influence deployment of memory rehabilitation advice. Participants, consisting of sixty five Community Psychiatric Nursing staff working in Community Mental Health Teams for the Elderly (CMHTEs) in Greater Glasgow NHS, completed specially developed questionnaires exploring knowledge of memory processes and knowledge of memory strategies. Data were collected in a structured group format. It was found that CPNs consider delivery of memory rehabilitation strategies as part of their role, but report limited knowledge of the wide range of potential memory strategies and aids. Specialist training should address this gap., Keywords: Alzheimer's; community based; dementia; memory rehabilitation Article note: 1. The latter variables were combined for ease of comprehension during the data analysis process. 383 ArticleAwareness, knowledge and application of [...]