Value of neuropsychological testing after head injuries in football

30Citations
Citations of this article
97Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

This paper reviews the pros and cons of the traditional paper and pencil and the newer computerised neuropsychological tests in the management of sports concussion. The differences between diagnosing concussion on the field and neuropsychological assessment at follow up and decision making with regard to return to play are described. The authors also discuss the issues involved in interpreting the results of neuropsychological testing (comparison with population norms versus player's own baseline test results) and potential problems of such testing in football. Finally, suggested recommendations for neuropsychological testing in football are given.

References Powered by Scopus

Cumulative Effects Associated with Recurrent Concussion in Collegiate Football Players: The NCAA Concussion Study

1329Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Summary and agreement statement of the 2nd International Conference on Concussion in Sport, Prague 2004

733Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Neuropsychological and psychosocial consequences of minor head injury

412Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Advances in sport concussion assessment: from behavioral to brain imaging measures

119Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Group versus individual administration affects baseline neurocognitive test performance

116Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Dynamic mechanical response of brain tissue in indentation in vivo, in situ and in vitro

105Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

McCrory, P., Makdissi, M., Davis, G., & Collie, A. (2005). Value of neuropsychological testing after head injuries in football. In British Journal of Sports Medicine (Vol. 39). https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2005.020776

Readers over time

‘10‘11‘12‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘2405101520

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 42

68%

Researcher 9

15%

Professor / Associate Prof. 8

13%

Lecturer / Post doc 3

5%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 28

42%

Psychology 18

27%

Sports and Recreations 12

18%

Neuroscience 8

12%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 11

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0