B – 139 Evaluating the Clinical Utility of ANAM 4 in the VA: A Critical Review

Abstract Objective This review evaluates the clinical utility of the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics (ANAM4) for assessing mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) in military and Veteran populations. ANAM’s effectiveness in detecting short- and long-term cognitive sequelae of mTBI, sensitivity to cumulative head injuries, and ability to identify domain-specific deficits are examined. This review critiques the translational value of ANAM4 data to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) clinical settings as a tool for baseline cognitive data and longitudinal tracking of brain health. Method We used scholarly research identified through searches in peer-reviewed research publication databases. Included studies involved military cohorts assessed with ANAM4, and prioritized evaluations of sensitivity, specificity, test-retest reliability, demographic influences, and comparisons to neuropsychological assessments. We used case examples to illustrate clinical strengths and limitations. Results Evidence supports ANAM4’s moderate sensitivity to acute mTBI-related deficits—particularly within 72 hours post-injury and in tasks measuring reaction time, processing speed, and learning. Limitations in long-term sensitivity, inconsistent test-retest reliability, lack of convergent validity, and overreliance on reaction time reduce its clinical interpretability. Inconsistencies in computerized administration platform, baseline testing, and medical record documentation further reduce translational value. Conclusion While ANAM4 provides a large-scale standardized screening option with baseline comparison potential, its clinical translation remains limited as a longitudinal tracking tool for brain health. Optimizing its utility will require improved data accessibility, task-specific scoring, integration with comprehensive neuropsychological assessments, and enhanced sensitivity to chronic and cumulative mTBI effects. Future efforts should prioritize standardization and multimodal validation to support ANAM4 and ANAM4E (ANAM4-Expanded) use in Veteran care.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology
Published
2025-09-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acaf084.289
Primary Topic
Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

B – 139 Evaluating the Clinical Utility of ANAM 4 in the VA: A Critical Review

Ryan Brewster, Angela C. Summers, Thomas K. Chacko, Michelle E. Costanzo et al.
Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology
Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
article

B – 139 Evaluating the Clinical Utility of ANAM 4 in the VA: A Critical Review

Ryan Brewster, Angela C. Summers, Thomas K. Chacko, Michelle E. Costanzo, Matthew J. Reinhard, Sherri Tschida, Robert D. Forsten, Erin M Parrish
article en

Abstract

Abstract Objective This review evaluates the clinical utility of the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics (ANAM4) for assessing mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) in military and Veteran populations. ANAM’s effectiveness in detecting short- and long-term cognitive sequelae of mTBI, sensitivity to cumulative head injuries, and ability to identify domain-specific deficits are examined. This review critiques the translational value of ANAM4 data to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) clinical settings as a tool for baseline cognitive data and longitudinal tracking of brain health. Method We used scholarly research identified through searches in peer-reviewed research publication databases. Included studies involved military cohorts assessed with ANAM4, and prioritized evaluations of sensitivity, specificity, test-retest reliability, demographic influences, and comparisons to neuropsychological assessments. We used case examples to illustrate clinical strengths and limitations. Results Evidence supports ANAM4’s moderate sensitivity to acute mTBI-related deficits—particularly within 72 hours post-injury and in tasks measuring reaction time, processing speed, and learning. Limitations in long-term sensitivity, inconsistent test-retest reliability, lack of convergent validity, and overreliance on reaction time reduce its clinical interpretability. Inconsistencies in computerized administration platform, baseline testing, and medical record documentation further reduce translational value. Conclusion While ANAM4 provides a large-scale standardized screening option with baseline comparison potential, its clinical translation remains limited as a longitudinal tracking tool for brain health. Optimizing its utility will require improved data accessibility, task-specific scoring, integration with comprehensive neuropsychological assessments, and enhanced sensitivity to chronic and cumulative mTBI effects. Future efforts should prioritize standardization and multimodal validation to support ANAM4 and ANAM4E (ANAM4-Expanded) use in Veteran care.

Archives of Clinical NeuropsychologyVol. 40(Supplement_2)
Openalex Percentile: Top 60%
Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.