A feasibility study of digital self-report measurement for brain injury patients utilizing an adapted version of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory - fourth edition.
Mikael Gewers, Kristian Borg, Uno Fors and 3 others
PMID 41058141WHAT IT FOUND
Patients with mild to moderate cognitive deficits completed a digital brain injury inventory twice with high consistency.
The tool matched community integration scores and showed that naming ability, not overall cognition, linked to reported participation difficulties. This supports using digital self-report for routine monitoring.
Key findings
01The digital inventory showed acceptable test-retest reliability over two weeks, with intraclass correlation values ranging from 0.86 to 0.93 for total scores and subscales.
02Reported participation difficulties correlated negatively with community integration scores, specifically social and home integration, supporting the tool's validity in capturing real-world engagement.
03Unlike general cognitive screening scores, naming ability was the only cognitive measure significantly associated with reported participation difficulties, highlighting the role of language in daily life.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The sample size was small (n=40) and included only patients with mild to moderate deficits (MoCA score ≥ 21), so results do not apply to those with severe impairment. There was no comparison with the paper-and-pencil version of the inventory, so equivalence between formats was not tested. Participants were relatively well-functioning and may have had greater ease using digital tools than more severely affected patients. The study did not include a pen-and-paper control group to directly compare administration methods.
Declared interests
The study was supported by the Promobilia Foundation. No other conflicts of interest were declared.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume this digital tool is equivalent to the paper-and-pencil version or suitable for patients with severe cognitive deficits. The study only tested feasibility in a small group of high-functioning patients and did not compare formats directly.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →