Novel ImPACT validity indices in collegiate student-athletes with and without histories of ADHD or academic difficulties

Neurodiversity in elite sport: a systematic scoping review

The objective of this systematic scoping review is to understand the extent and scope of evidence regarding neurodiversity in elite sport. This systematic scoping review considered epidemiological studies, com mentary and viewpoints papers, systematic review and meta-analyses, and any intervention or clinical treatment, management and practice studies in relation to neurodiversity in elite sport. Case studies and grey literature were ineligible for review. Neurodivergence included neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism spectrum disorder, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and specific learning disorders. Elite sport was defined as Olympic, Paralympic, national, international, professional and semiprofessional sport. The final 23 studies included in this review comprised 10 observational studies, 4 systematic/narrative reviews, 6 commentary/position statements and 3 qualitative studies. The literature reflected a major focus on ADHD as a risk factor for concussion and prognosis for postconcussion recovery. Further, there was a focus on the medical management of ADHD, regarding adherence to sporting antidoping regulations. One study focused on the experience of autism in athletes in elite sport settings through qualitative interviews. One study focused on anxiety disorders in elite athletes, with ADHD emerging as a major risk factor. There is a strong rationale for future research to build on the evidence for neurodiversity in elite sport to foster supportive and inclusive elite sporting environments.

Athletes With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Position Statement of the American Medical Society for Sports Medicine

ABSTRACT

Athletes of all ages may be affected by medical and mental health issues. Sports medicine physicians should be familiar with common conditions that may affect the well-being of athletes, such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). ADHD behaviors have the potential to affect a person's ability to concentrate. It is likely that social and cognitive therapies combined with pharmacotherapy will be the most effective way to treat ADHD in athletes. Medications used for ADHD, especially stimulant types, are known to improve alertness, reaction time, anaerobic performance, and endurance, which would potentially improve athletic performance. Furthermore, stimulant medications may enable student athletes with ADHD to focus on academic studies for longer periods of time, beyond usual levels of fatigue, important for those who may be exhausted after practices and games. The purported performance enhancement effects and potential adverse effects of stimulant medications have prompted many sports governing bodies to ban prescription stimulants or establish strict rules for their use. Athletes taking physician-prescribed stimulants to treat ADHD need to provide the appropriate documentation for approval before competition or risk punitive measures. Physicians should strive to provide a high quality of care to athletes with ADHD through early diagnosis, appropriate and careful multidisciplinary treatment, and complete and timely documentation to facilitate continued sports participation.

An updated review of the prevalence of invalid performance on the Immediate Post-Concussion and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT)

Objective: Performance validity assessment is an important component of concussion baseline testing and Immediate Post-Concussion and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) is the most commonly used test in this setting. A review of invalid performance on ImPACT was published in 2017, focusing largely on the default embedded validity indicator (Default EVI) provided within the test. There has since been a proliferation in research evaluating the classification accuracy of the Default EVI against independently developed, alternative ImPACT-based EVIs, necessitating an updated review. The purpose of this study was to provide an up-to-date review of the prevalence of invalid performance on ImPACT and to examine the relative effectiveness of ImPACT-based EVIs. Method: Literature related to the prevalence of invalid performance on ImPACT and the effectiveness of ImPACT-based EVIs, published between January 2000 and May 2020, was critically reviewed. Results: A total of 23 studies reported prevalence of invalid performance at baseline testing using ImPACT. Six percent of baseline assessments were found to be invalid by the ImPACT's Default EVI, and between 22.31% and 34.99% were flagged by alternative EVIs. Six studies assessed the effectiveness of ImPACT-based EVIs, with the Default EVI correctly identifying experimental malingerers only 60% of the time. Alternative ImPACT-based EVIs identified between 73% and 100% of experimental malingerers. Conclusions: The ImPACT's Default EVI is not sufficiently sensitive, and clinicians should consider alternative indicators when assessing invalid performance. Accordingly, the base rate of invalid performance in athletes at baseline testing is likely well above the 6% previously reported.

Influence of Special Education, ADHD, Autism, and Learning Disorders on ImPACT Validity Scores in High School Athletes

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.