TY  - JOUR
PY  - 2023//
TI  - Introducing the Concussion Recognition Tool 6 (CRT6)
JO  - British journal of sports medicine
A1  - Echemendia, Ruben J.
A1  - Ahmed, Osman Hassan
A1  - Bailey, Christopher M.
A1  - Bruce, Jared M.
A1  - Burma, Joel S.
A1  - Davis, Gavin A.
A1  - Gioia, Gerry
A1  - Howell, David
A1  - Fuller, Gordon Ward
A1  - Master, Christina L.
A1  - van Ierssel, Jacqueline
A1  - Pardini, Jamie
A1  - Schneider, Kathryn J.
A1  - Walton, Samuel R.
A1  - Zemek, Roger
A1  - Patricios, Jon
SP  - 689
EP  - 691
VL  - 57
IS  - 11
N2  - Background and rationale    The Concussion In Sport Group (CISG) first developed the Sport Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT)1 during its 2004 meeting in Prague to serve as an educational tool for the public and to assist healthcare professionals (HCPs) in evaluating sport-related concussion (SRC). The SCAT has been revised several times, including the most recent SCAT6.2 The SCAT6 and its predecessors were designed for use by HCPs. However, HCPs are rarely present at many, if not most, sporting and recreational activities, particularly at the community level involving children and adolescents. Understanding this void in concussion care, the CISG designed the Pocket SCAT2 in 2009 following the 3rd International Consensus Conference in Zurich3 as a tool to assist the layperson recognise the signs and symptoms of suspected SRC at all ages. The tool was also designed to provide guidance for removing an athlete from activity and seeking further medical assessment. The Pocket SCAT2 was revised by the CISG in 20124 and renamed the Pocket Concussion Recognition Tool (CRT) and subsequently the CRT 5 (CRT5).5 This paper introduces the most recent version, the CRT6.   Development process    The Sixth International Conference on Concussion in Sport was convened in Amsterdam in October 2022. The consensus approach followed the process used by the CISG in prior consensus meetings1: develop questions to explore the most up-to-date scientific literature2; perform systematic reviews of the literature3; present the results of the 10 reviews and selected abstracts in open forums, including discussion by participants in attendance and the inclusion of the athlete voice; conduct an expert panel consensus meeting to evaluate and vote on recommendations arising from the open meetings and reviews; and identify a subset of co-authors from the 'tools' systematic reviews who met separately to discuss and implement recommendations for modifying the …<p />  <p>Language: en</p>
LA  - en
SN  - 0306-3674
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2023-106851
ID  - ref1
ER  -