Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain!Just think of all the trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 493 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal.

Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.
My back ground story is here:

Wednesday, February 21, 2018

Uncorrected versus demographically-corrected scores on the NIH toolbox cognition battery in persons with traumatic brain injury and stroke

So rather than solve any of the problems in stroke, they take the easy route and just do analysis that does nothing for getting survivors to 100% recovery. What a fucking waste of time and money.  I would ream out those mentors and senior researchers that approve this crap.
Rehabilitation Psychology , Volume 62(4) , Pgs. 485-495.

NARIC Accession Number: J77635.  What's this?
ISSN: 0090-5550.
Author(s): Nitsch, Kristian P.; Casaletto, Kaitlin B.; Carlozzi, Noelle E.; Tulsky, David S.; Heinemann, Allen W.; Heaton, Robert K..
Project Number: 90RT5008 (formerly H133B090024).
Publication Year: 2017.
Number of Pages: 11.
Abstract: Study compared uncorrected versus demographically corrected scores on the National Institutes of Health Toolbox-Cognition Battery (NIHTB-CB) in individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and stroke. Three hundred ninety-five adults with TBI or stroke were demographically matched to 394 non-injured controls, and were administered the NIHTB-CB. Published “corrected scores” are adjusted for age, education, sex, and race/ethnicity; “uncorrected scores” were created using census data to represent the average adult in the United States population. Results showed effect sizes for the TBI and stroke groups versus controls were larger using corrected scores compared with uncorrected scores for the fluid composite. For the crystallized composite, effect sizes for the TBI and stroke groups versus controls were smaller and nonsignificant using corrected scores. In the injury groups, demographic characteristics accounted for up to 33 percent of variance in uncorrected scores, but less than 5 percent of variance in corrected scores. Corrected scores were more sensitive to neurocognitive impairments in the brain-injured groups. Corrected scores have the advantage of controlling for variance associated with premorbid factors rather than changes in neurological functioning; are more helpful in characterizing acquired neurocognitive changes; and can aid in the interpretation of test performance.

Can this document be ordered through NARIC's document delivery service*?: Y.

Citation: Nitsch, Kristian P., Casaletto, Kaitlin B., Carlozzi, Noelle E., Tulsky, David S., Heinemann, Allen W., Heaton, Robert K.. (2017). Uncorrected versus demographically-corrected scores on the NIH toolbox cognition battery in persons with traumatic brain injury and stroke.  Rehabilitation Psychology , 62(4), Pgs. 485-495. Retrieved 2/21/2018, from REHABDATA database.

No comments:

Post a Comment